Forensic Science in the Work of a Prosecutor: Nonsense or an Urgent Need?
https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.118.9.113-119
Abstract
The paper substantiates the position of the authors criticized by some modern domestic scientists on the need for a prosecutor to possess forensic knowledge when exercising supervision over the observance of law in the investigation of crimes. The results of an analysis of law enforcement practice, authors’ own experience in the system of advanced professional training of prosecutors and the examples of the prosecutorial examination of on-site inspection reports and expert findings for identification of not only violations of the criminal procedure law, but also errors of a criminalistic nature, support this position. This approach will allow the prosecutor to identify the existing gaps in the evidence base, determine the possibility, ways and means of filling them, and ultimately make a legal and informed decision. The authors conclude that only in the case of sufficient knowledge in the field of forensic science (recommendations for studying the materials of a criminal case on a particular type of crime, as well as the methodology for investigating this crime), the prosecutor’s decision to return the criminal case for additional investigation or other decisions provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, will be reasonable and motivated.
About the Authors
N. A. DanilovaNatalya A. Danilova, Dr. Sci. (Law), Professor, Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics
Liteynyy pr-t., d. 44, St. Petersburg, Russia, 191104
T. G. Nikolaeva
Tatyana G. Nikolaeva, Dr. Sci. (Law), Professor, Professor of the Department of Criminal Procedure and Criminalistics
Liteynyy pr-t., d. 44, St. Petersburg, Russia, 191104
References
1. Belkin R. S. Obshchaya teoriya sovetskoj kriminalistiki. — Voronezh, 1986. — 397 s.
2. Grigor’eva M. A., Danilova N. A. Kriminalistika v deyatel’nosti prokurora: voprosy teorii i praktiki // Rossijskij sledovatel’ — 2014. — № 6. — S. 3—8.
3. Danilova N. A., Nikolaeva T. G. Analiz prokurorom materialov ugolovnogo dela: ugolovno-processual’nyj i kriminalisticheskij aspekty // Vestnik Akademii General’noj prokuratury RF. — 2014. — № 2 (40). — S. 67—72.
4. Danilova N. A., Elagina E. V., Nikolaeva T. G. O nekotoryh aspektah analiza i ocenki prokurorom materialov proverki soobshcheniya o prestuplenii // Vestnik Orlovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. — 2013. — Vyp. 3. — S. 11—15.
5. Isaenko V. N. Kriminalisticheskaya podgotovka prokurorskih rabotnikov, uchastvuyushchih v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve // Zakonnost’. — 2011. — № 6. — S. 3—7.
6. Isaenko V. N. Metodika podderzhaniya gosudarstvennogo obvineniya (ponyatie, principy, soderzhanie) : monografiya. — M. : Yurlitinform, 2011. — 176 s.
7. Kriminalisticheskij analiz i ocenka prokurorom materialov ugolovnogo dela : monografiya / N. A. Danilova, V. N. Isaenko, O. N. Korshunova, T. G. Nikolaeva ; otv. red. V. N. Isaenko ; Akad. Gen. prokuratury Ros. Federacii. — M., 2013—244 s.
8. Kriminalistika dlya gosudarstvennyh obvinitelej : uchebnik / pod red. A. F. Kozuseva, V. N. Isaenko, A. M. Kustova ; Akademiya General’noj prokuratury RF. — M. : Norma, Infra-M, 2012. — 480 s.
Review
For citations:
Danilova N.A., Nikolaeva T.G. Forensic Science in the Work of a Prosecutor: Nonsense or an Urgent Need? Actual Problems of Russian Law. 2020;15(9):113-119. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17803/1994-1471.2020.118.9.113-119