<<
>>

2.1. General provisions of a criminalistic technique of investigation in structure of investigation of malfeasances

The criminalistic characteristic of malfeasances as scientific reflexion of criminal activity and an element of a technique of investigation assumes, to be exact to tell, creates an objective basis for development of methodical recommendations about investigation of official illegal acts and carrying out tactics on them of investigatory actions.

In turn, in the system maintenance of logic and functional directions of criminalistic activity the technique of investigation of malfeasances structurally in many respects is under construction on the basis of general provisions of a criminalistic technique of investigation of crimes as taken place universal model of preliminary investigation [244]. Accordingly, formation of a patrimonial technique of investigation of malfeasances with its subsequent division on groups and separate kinds originally starts with necessity of the analysis of general provisions of a technique, its structure and functional properties. And the corresponding analysis of general provisions of a technique demands its consideration in dynamics of applied development, that in a foreshortening of criminalistic researches means, first, an orientation evoljutsionirovanija techniques from a scientific category to practical application with the further filling by its results of investigatory and research activity. Secondly, technique general provisions are studied with the "consumer" purpose of use of its parts and separate elements in a technique of investigation of concrete groups and kinds of crimes, in our case – made by officials.
S.JU.Kosarev's researches show, that formation of general provisions of a criminalistic technique has begun in 70-80th years HH century on the basis of development of criminalistic techniques of separate kinds of crimes and with simultaneous understanding of a formed category of the criminalistic characteristic of crimes as their initial element [245]. Accordingly, the generalised consideration of criminalistic techniques led to an establishment scientists of their essence and the purposes developed thus and problems in criminalistic activity that became result of development of corresponding definitions.
So, A.N.Vasilev defined a criminalistic technique as developed on the basis of studying of investigatory practice, ways of a crime and the mechanism of formation of their traces system of recommendations about criminalistic classification of crimes, the organisations initial and the subsequent periods of investigation, and also about features of application of tactical receptions and scientific and technical means with a view of effective investigation [246].
N.A.Selivanov connected a technique with the ultimate fact in system interconnected and vzaimoobuslovlennyh the investigatory actions which are carried out in the best sequence for an establishment of all necessary circumstances of business and proving on the basis of planning [247].
N.L.pomegranate understood most expediently organised system of tactical, technical, operatively-search and organizational receptions and the means recommended by criminalistics for disclosing, investigation and the prevention of crimes as a technique of investigation of crimes [248].
According to I.A.Vozgrina's position, the criminalistic technique of investigation of crimes, being independent final section of a science of criminalistics, studies laws of the organisation of work of inspectors on criminal prosecution of the persons who have made criminal actions, with a view of development according to requirements of laws of scientifically proved and practically checked up effective private techniques of investigation of separate kinds of crimes [249].

N.P.Yablokov a technique of investigation of separate kinds of crimes represents as the complete part of criminalistics studying criminal experience of fulfilment of crimes and investigatory practice of their investigation, developing on the basis of knowledge of criminal laws system of the most effective methods of investigation and the prevention of different kinds of crimes [250].
Certainly, the concept of a technique of investigation far is not settled by the definitions resulted here, and has tens (if not hundreds) various definitions in researches on criminalistics, in particular in the works devoted to a technique of investigation of separate crimes or their groups. We have resulted only most widespread points of view which demand the analysis.
Definition of a technique of the investigation, given to A.N.Vasilevym, contains more than practical sense and is not beyond a criminalistics subject, consolidating its sections about the criminalistic technics and tactics. The same practical sights at a technique of investigation of crimes adhere to I.A.Vozgrin and N.P.Yablokov. In applied value it is possible to agree with such definition of a technique, certainly. However behind frameworks of its understanding in a more comprehensive sense – scientific and legal – there are judicial purposes of investigation of a crime, proving of circumstances of business on a concrete crime, on what has specified N.A.Selivanov. In turn, N.L.pomegranate's point of view imposes us rare introduction in the maintenance of a criminalistic technique of concept of operatively-search receptions at disclosing, investigation and the prevention of crimes without what investigatory activity is practically impossible.
Despite listed and other points of view concerning definitions of concept of a technique of investigation, it is visible, that as a matter of fact it is a question of uniform judgement of a considered category where it is more the than general, than especial. It is confirmed with the conclusions made R.S.Belkin which notices, that at technique studying all authors define it as system of elements and system of means in investigation of crimes. However, further the scientist by certain criteria spends differentiation of the definitions given by various authors [251].
About the consolidating beginning of a criminalistic technique writes also S.JU.Kosarev, specifying, that set of modern criminalistic techniques of investigation represents system, that is is set of the components connected among themselves possessing quite certain functions [252]. In this sense the scientific explanation of concept, problems, general provisions and principles of a technique of investigation as has noticed V.K.Gavlo, makes direct impact on working out of "private techniques╗ which in many cases essentially and unfairly differ from each other even if it is a question of the same techniques [253].
And at last, about the general understanding of a technique of investigation of crimes has expressed in one of O.J.Baev's new works, having noticed, that źat all variety of formulations all researchers are uniform in opinion: the criminalistic technique represents the appendix and corresponding interpretation of achievements of private theories of this science, the criminalistic technics and criminalistic tactics to specificity of investigation of separate kinds and categories of crimes╗ [254].
In our opinion, hardly probably to make full definition of a technique of investigation of crimes which at once would cover all parties of the given concept and to it would arrange all. The criminalistic technique is the extensive section of criminalistics consolidating scientific workings out and conclusions about activity of law enforcement bodies, their investigatory and operative services directed on disclosing, investigation and the prevention of crimes. It is a final part of branch of the criminalistics incorporating all its previous sections – the general theory, the criminalistic technics and tactics. Besides, its sources are norms criminal and the criminal procedure, extensive practice of crime control and sections of other sciences [255]. All it complicates deducing of the general definition of a technique which would suit all scientists and certainly would be accepted by experts. Let's try to allocate, however, most the general lines of a criminalistic technique, taking for a basis theoretical views of scientists-criminalists and some the general, that is consolidating positions of a technique in our understanding.
We consider, that the maintenance of concept of a criminalistic technique of investigation of crimes includes following components:
1. It is uniform system of interdependent components:
– The general criminalistic characteristic (structure) of a crime, the patrimonial (group) criminalistic characteristic of a crime and the criminalistic characteristic of separate kinds of crimes;
– Definition of investigatory situations, promotion of versions and investigation planning;
– Interaction of the inspector with the operatively-search and other bodies participating in investigation of a crime;
– Stages of investigation of a crime;
– Features of tactics of manufacture of investigatory actions;
– Overcoming of counteraction to a consequence and maintenance of safety of participants of the criminal trial;
– The prevention of crimes.
2. Problems of a technique of investigation are:
– Studying of criminal activity;
– Revealing and suppression of crimes (before criminal case excitation);
– Investigation of crimes with the maintenance of their disclosing;
– An establishment of the circumstances promoting fulfilment of crimes;
– Overcoming of counteraction to crime investigation;
– Proving of circumstances of the crime provided by the criminal procedure law [256];
– Creation of scientific bases of a technique of investigation.
3. The technique as system contains the subsystems (levels) of techniques of investigations connected among themselves:
– General provisions of a criminalistic technique of investigation with a constituting component – the general technique of investigation;
– A patrimonial technique of investigation of separate groups and kinds of crimes;
– Private techniques of investigation of separate kinds of crimes.
4. Sources of system of a technique which concern and the named subsystems, are:
– Norms of the criminal law;
– Norms of the criminal procedure law;
– The general theory of criminalistics;
– The information on criminal activity;
– The criminalistic technics;
– Criminalistic tactics;
– The theory and practice of operatively-search activity;
– The theory of knowledge with logic and psychology elements;
– Practical experience of disclosing and investigation of crimes.
The complete system of a criminalistic technique of investigation of the crimes, starting with laws of criminal activity, at the general, special and individual methods of disclosing and investigation of crimes generates, as we have shown, subsystems, or levels, criminalistic techniques which in process of development of investigatory experience, their generalisation and a scientific substantiation constantly develop and become complicated [257].
Today the position about three-level system of a technique of investigation about which to one of the first spoke V.G.Tanasevich [258] more and more affirms. Its maintenance includes the category of general provisions of a criminalistic technique mentioned by us. Then in system unity general provisions pass to patrimonial and group techniques of investigation and in last link – private techniques of investigation of separate kinds of crimes. Here it is necessary to mention also V.E.Kornouhova's believing point of view that there are also interpatrimonial and interspecific techniques of investigation of crimes on "joint" of fulfilment of several crimes [259]. We can agree With it, but with two remarks. First, interspecific and interpatrimonial techniques exist only on the basis of specific and patrimonial techniques; Secondly, they exist not as law, and as an exception with the subsequent loss of adjacent functions as necessity of proving of circumstances of a crime and their qualification is based on a technique of investigation of separate kinds of crimes.
Levels of a criminalistic technique are full enough realised in a technique of investigation of malfeasances when after technique general provisions the patrimonial technique of investigation of all system of the malfeasances is carried out, containing their general criminalistic characteristic that allows to create algorithmic directions of remedial, investigatory and operative actions. Accordingly, the patrimonial technique is divided into group techniques of investigation under forms of infringement of official powers, under the named earlier specific forms of infringement of official powers and with features of investigation of crimes in sphere of infringement of constitutional laws, in economic sphere, in sphere of crimes against interests state and municipal authority and against justice. At last, exist techniques of investigation of separate kinds of crimes which can be considerably developed (bribe reception, excess of official powers, office forgery, etc.) or to have only theoretical recommendations in a kind of actual absence investigatory and judiciary practice.
Isolation of a patrimonial technique of investigation of malfeasances with its subsequent differentiation on groups and kinds does not mean uterju its initial basis – general provisions of a criminalistic technique. Moreover, sistemnost techniques of investigation of all set of malfeasances, their scientific obobshchennost means a close connection with the general system of a criminalistic technique owing to their general organizational and functional properties. It speaks level of philosophy of a science the nature of social sciences (in our case – criminalistics) where the requirement of synthesising of the reached successes occurs mainly at level of joint researches and conceptual conclusions [260]. R.S.Belkin in the same direction specified, that the system of scientific positions includes only that part of the criminalistic theory which contains generalisations, the conclusions reflecting general for all private techniques of investigation [261].
Many scientists-criminalists are engaged in working out of bases of a criminalistic technique of investigation: N.M.Bukaev and V.V. Jarovenko [262], V.P.Vodjanitsky [263], I.A.Vozgrin [264], JU.V.Gavrilin and N.G.Shuruhnov [265], L.J.Drapkin and V.N.Karagodin [266], S.P.Mitrichev [267], V.A.Obraztsov [268], A.S.podshibjakin [269], N.A.Selivanov [270], A.A.eksarhopulo [271], etc. Despite the discrimination to creation of general provisions of a technique, its maintenance partially or completely and, in our opinion, quite obosnovanno joins following typical components: concept, a subject and system of construction of a technique; object of a criminalistic technique; technique principles; technique sources; a parity of a technique of investigation with criminal and the criminal procedure; the theory of the criminalistic characteristic of crimes; concept and essence of an investigatory situation; the doctrine and tactics of investigatory actions; the doctrine about investigatory versions; Planned character of investigation; concept of stages of investigation; questions of the organisation of investigation; general provisions of use of special knowledge at investigation; general provisions of interaction of the inspector with agencies in charge of preliminary investigation, the public etc.
It is not called in question, that working out of general provisions of a criminalistic technique always rendered and influences patrimonial, group and private techniques when the permission of the general questions naturally influences the especial. Return process has the same active movement when private methodical recommendations feed and harden general provisions of a technique of investigation of crimes. In view of comparative novelty of knowledge of general provisions of a criminalistic technique of investigation of crimes today before it there are following problems: 1) its uniform understanding, but with variability of components included in it; 2) efficiency of general provisions of a criminalistic technique with prednaznachennostju for construction on its basis of other group and private techniques; 3) a practical orientation of its construction for direct use at investigation of other crimes in a case occurrence of the difficult situations which have been not developed in existing private and patrimonial techniques.
Proceeding from logic necessity of applied understanding of general provisions of a criminalistic technique of investigation, it is necessary to consider the given category with related which practically is its component – the general technique of investigation of crimes. And to consider not only in the theoretical relation – as scientific base for construction of other techniques, but also in a practical foreshortening of its application at investigation of groups and kinds of crimes and, moreover, particularly separate crimes, in this case – in the ratio with a technique of investigation of malfeasances. The criminalistics theory in this occasion contains a number of the debatable points of view of scientists.
So, I.A.Vozgrin understood the general technique of investigation of crimes as its scientifically proved theoretical model. It included in its maintenance: the description and an explanation of concept and the maintenance of criminalistic techniques regardless to kinds of investigated crimes where only basic principles of their working out and realisation are investigated; problems which should dare with their help; structure of complexes of criminalistic methodical recommendations and other starting positions intended to persons, developing group and private techniques [272]. We will notice, that in due time about it also wrote A.V.Dulov, specifying, that źthe permission of theoretical problems at more general level would be a methodological basis for working out of theoretical positions of the subsequent level of a technique of investigation╗ [273].
Agreeing with thought, that, really, general technique of investigation carries out the theoretical function intended for generalisation and creation other, group and private, of techniques [274], we cannot agree with its tearing away from practice which is not mentioned or is seldom mentioned at the analysis of the given concept.
Consistently this thought S.N.Churilov, the truth, speaking a little about other category – the doctrine about the general method of investigation as which it is necessary to understand the system of knowledge reflecting laws of functioning of the general method of investigation as a method of practical activities, spends its internal structural organisation:
– Laws of an estimation of an investigatory situation;
– Laws of a choice of the typical program of investigation;
– Laws of adaptation of the typical program of investigation to features and conditions of investigation of a concrete crime;
– Laws of realisation of the individual program of investigation on criminal case [275].
At the same time S.N.Churilov tries to include the general method of investigation of crimes in the general theory of criminalistics. However in this case the general technique of investigation can "leave" section of a technique of investigation in its practical mission in theory area that is hardly admissible proceeding from purely applied purposes specified by the author. However it is necessary to notice, that in the subsequent works the scientist ranks the general method of investigation of crimes as its practical vision, specifying on efficiency of its application at investigation of criminal cases [276].
At the same time we, as well as other criminalists, should note discrepancy of the term źthe general method of investigation╗. S.N.Churilov tries to define it literally – as one method for investigation of all crimes, at level of a certain absolute [277]. Such it is hardly admissible both in the theory, and in practice. Moreover, as soon as we will try to apply źthe general method of investigation╗ at once we will face variety of various methods, initial information, typical plans etc., about what S.N.Churilov [278] speaks also.
Interestingly also other opinion: quite often criminalists, not speaking about the general technique of investigation, actually show its necessity for applied mission. So, M.V.Subbotin specifies, that the modern condition of a criminalistic technique testifies to necessity of creation of typical structure of a base technique which will form a necessary basis for the further perfection of base techniques [279]. In our opinion, speech also goes about the general technique of investigation as general for base techniques. Other here is hardly possible.
N.P.Yablokov and A.J.Golovin, speaking about techniques of investigation of any level of a generality, specify in necessity of revealing and the analysis concrete criminally-legal, criminal procedure, kriminologicheskih and criminalistic significant signs of crimes and necessity of disclosing of character of communication and interrelation of the basic structural elements of criminal activity [280].
The vivid example connected with a technique of investigation suffices, it is resulted in J.P.Garmaeva and A.F.Lubina's work, which support concrete and the general (naming its base) techniques of investigation of crimes [281]. In one example they give the description of difficulties which the young inspector of Office of Public Prosecutor investigating criminal case about set of malfeasances in customs sphere has faced, connected with office forgeries and forging of documents, abusings official powers, contraband etc. Active searches of a technique of investigation of similar crimes from the inspector in what have not resulted. And then the inspector, ź… trusting only to the intuition and councils of skilled colleagues, at times as blind,ź groping ╗signs of crimes new to, the traces left criminals, facing and hardly overcoming unknown hitherto, furious counteraction of interested persons╗, investigated the given criminal case within 6 months and has directed it to court [282].
We will be objective – for six months to investigate the most complicated case without any technique it is impossible. That is we cannot admit, that any technique of investigation was not applied at all. If such to assume, in investigation can be engaged and people of other trades – philologists, mathematicians etc., investigations of crimes not owning in general any technique. In this case, if there was no patrimonial (group) or private technique of investigation of the specified kind, and is more true, groups of malfeasances there is only one: the inspector used the general technique of investigation. It, in our opinion, also promoted successful disclosing and investigation of all criminal picture of the committed crime or, more truly, sets of the interconnected crimes. I specify in the same situations the Island. Baev when writes, that a number of general provisions of a technique of investigation allows the inspector to create rather rational technique of investigation even from among those in which relation there is no developed private technique or that is unknown to the given inspector [283].
Here we will result also N.P.Yablokov's approving opinion, that obshchemetodicheskie the beginnings of a modern technique of investigation of crimes contain system of methods for the analysis and an estimation of the primary fact sheet, definition of a complex of sequence of initial and subsequent investigatory actions in various investigatory situations, combinations of investigatory and operatively-search actions etc. [284]
In respect of the proving theory at level of the general technique of investigation of crimes effective ways of reception of proofs and their check on investigated criminal cases without what purposeful preliminary investigation as a whole is impossible are developed. Between the purposes and methods of search of the proofs, all process of proving and practical skills of a technique of investigation of crimes there are direct communications, therefore scientists specify in applied elements of criminalistics or criminalistic proving. For example, I.M.Luzgin and R.S.Belkin as a whole analyze knowledge methods at collecting, research and evaluation of evidence in a technique of investigation of crimes and tactics of carrying out of investigatory actions [285]. A.R.Belkin investigates private criminalistic theories of causality, time relations, criminalistic forecasting, criminalistic identification in their parity with the theory of proving [286]. A.V.Dulov and A.S. Rubis allocate criminalistic laws (matrixes, models) formations of the maintenance of activity on proving as the specific activity which is carried out in interests of justice [287]. It specifies all in a close connection of the theory of proving in the criminal trial with the general technique of investigation of crimes, and then with the subsequent patrimonial and specific techniques.
Thereby, constituting components of general provisions of a criminalistic technique and the general technique of investigation of crimes are a basis of investigation of malfeasances owing to following connecting factors of the general criminalistic character:
– The general criminalistic elements of crimes;
– Establishments of the purposes of investigation and the circumstances which are coming under to proving proceeding from norms of the criminal procedure law;
– Divisions of preliminary investigation into typical stages: verifying, initial, disclosings of a crime, the basic stage of the investigation, finishing;
– Studying of the person of the criminal proceeding from the purposes of disclosing of a crime and proving of its guilt on the basis of requirements of elements of the corpus delicti;
– Collecting of the documentary data establishing a legal status of the person, it is direct or oposredovanno connected with committing a crime;
– Carrying out of verifying actions under the collected proofs for the purpose of an establishment of the corpus delicti and guilt of the person, its made;
– Carrying out of investigatory actions for the purpose of the decision of tactical problems of directly investigatory action and strategic problems of all preliminary investigation;
– Tactically true and legally proved use of results of operatively-search activity;
– Establishments of the caused harm as a result of a crime;
– Tactically true ways of reaction to counteraction to preliminary investigation with maintenance of safety of participants of the criminal trial etc.
Speaking about the general technique of investigation of crimes as a way not only practical actions, but also thinking of the inspector with logic and psychology elements, it is necessary to notice, that actually three-level system of a technique of investigation of crimes (the general, patrimonial and private) coincides with the developed laws of the theory of knowledge and thinking psychology. As V.F.Julov specifies, the professional way of actions assumes raznourovnevuju structure involved kognitsy: fundamental ideas, theories of an average level and empirical generalisations [288]. And as criminal case investigation is an active process of knowledge of the world by collecting of the information and thought processes under their analysis, and is frequent in the absence of the external logic of the committed crime, the executor (the inspector, the operative worker) should own all degrees of thinking – the general, patrimonial and concrete. It is necessary to express thus a critical sight at some collections of practical recommendations for inspectors where not always there are sections about positions of the general technique of investigation of crimes which would train investigatory and operative workers in practical work to use the general categories of disclosing and investigation of crimes [289].
Differently, the general technique of investigation of crimes assumes development of the professional thinking, one of which signs is nadsituativnyj thinking level. Such level is characterised by an exit of the subject for limits of directly concrete situation [290], that is signs, let us assume, only one crime or the unique version of its fulfilment. It is a question of such prominent aspect of thinking as ability to see mutual relation of the external phenomena and people participating in them, to generate their operational sense, that is to see communications between the various acts received about them by data both on general, and at private level. On the basis of professional experience, theoretical knowledge, intuitions the inspector models various situations, mentally builds relations between people, supposing various variations of relations within the general logic and behind its limits [291]. Thereof there is a formation of the system approach at investigation of crimes as any crime is a result of certain relations between people in their dynamics and the qualitative party of interaction [292].
Here too it is necessary to explain, that we mean, when we say, that committing a crime often is beyond logic, positions of the general psychology or elementary common sense.
In our opinion, practically any crime is a certain alogism of made acts, behaviour, that is absence of usual logic and reasonable understanding of laws of human existence. Hardly murder, causing of physical injuries, plunders, it is possible to explain official abusings and other crimes any normal logic categories, forming of usual relations between people. At all is not present. In the criminal world by preparation and fulfilment of crimes much arises spontaneously, under influence concerning sudden and not provided factors, at individual psychological perception of physical facts and its unhealthy interpretation. At the same time here the place other logic – logic of criminal encroachments, specificity of laws of fulfilment of the crimes, investigated criminalistic by is taken. Against the general technique of investigation it demands from the inspector of an independent way of thinking, construction of system communications at level of intuition and logic in absolutely illogical, at first sight, situations of made crimes. A.R.Abdullin specifies, that on an example of laws of logic as explicit expression of laws of thinking it is visible, that to intuitive comprehension is accessible not only something perceived, but also only mentally represented. Thus the person in a condition to distinguish mentally represented from simple fiction. In the first case the essence is given and samoraskryvaetsja in the necessity, and for the second case of such necessity is not present. It, according to the scientist, allows to speak about intuition as about rational inherently the certificate [293].
So, having defined practical mission of general provisions of a technique of investigation at its use in investigation of malfeasances, we will present in a schematical variant the general methodical recommendations about investigation of crimes, having divided them on five stages:
I stage – verifying:
– Consideration of sources of the information under the arrived message on a crime (check materials, scene survey, the statement, an appearance with guilty, results of operatively-search activity);
– Additional verifying actions (reception of explanations from participating persons, reclamation of additional data from operatively-search bodies, appointment of preliminary researches, audits or inspections, departure to a scene for survey or its visual representation, consultation of experts);
– An establishment of character and the size of the caused harm;
– Comparison of the criminalistic characteristic of the given kind of crimes to actual facts of established act;
– An estimation of an admissibility of the received data for their application at excitation of criminal case and use subsequently at proving of circumstances of criminal case;
– A parity of the received data on circumstances of the act having signs of a crime, with norms of criminal law, other acts connected with UK the Russian Federation, comments of laws, decisions of plenums of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and judiciary practice precedents;
– Acceptance of measures for crime suppression;
– Acceptance of the remedial decision on criminal case excitation.
II stage – initial (II and III stages can on the basic investigatory actions and operative actions to coincide in case the crime is opened at an initial stage of investigation):
– Carrying out initial remedial (including investigatory) actions without which the further investigation will be inconvenient or is impossible (detention of the criminal, carrying out of operative experiment, the basic or additional survey of a scene, withdrawal of subjects or documents, etc.);
– A summer residence of the instructions directed on immediate suppression of a crime;
– Interrogations of the basic participants of criminal case (the suspect who has sustained, eyewitnesses of a crime);
– Appointment of all possible examinations on the physical persons withdrawn to material objects and corpses for immediate fastening of established traces of a crime;
– Studying of operatively-search given and other data of not remedial character;
– A summer residence of commissions to operatively-search bodies in the oral or written form for revealing of the necessary information on a crime, made his faces etc.;
– Comparison of circumstances of a crime to the criminalistic and criminally-legal characteristic of the given kind of a crime;
– Proceeding from the information received at an initial stage, working out of versions and planning of remedial and operative actions for each of versions.
III stage – crime disclosings. It is characterised by check of each of versions by carrying out of following actions:
– Interrogations of all revealed witnesses;
– Reception of the conclusions of examinations and appointment new by results of the spent examinations;
– Studying of the person sustained (interrogations of relatives and acquaintances, reclamation of help data, reclamation of characteristics from a residence, works or studies, data from former places of work, a finding in the places of confinement etc., carrying out of judicial-psychiatric or judicial-psychological examinations in case of need);
– Manufacture of other possible and necessary investigatory actions;
– Carrying out of remedial activity, investigatory actions and operatively-search actions for revealing, neutralisation and elimination of the factors counteracting preliminary investigation;
– A direction of inquiries for reception of help data (about previous convictions, an account condition in medical institutions, psychiatric and narcological clinics, etc.) about the suspect who has sustained, other persons;
– Studying of the person of the suspect (interrogations of relatives and acquaintances, reclamation of help data, reclamation of characteristics from a residence, works or studies, data from former places of work, a finding in the places of confinement etc., carrying out of judicial-psychiatric or judicial-psychological examinations in case of need);
– Set of carrying out of operatively-search actions by independently operatively-search bodies and on the instructions of the inspector for an establishment of the person (persons) who have committed a crime;
– Search of the suspect;
– Interrogation of the suspect;
– Check of arguments of the suspect by carrying out of investigatory actions and operatively-search actions:
– The analysis of reliability, the relevancy and an admissibility of all received proofs and other data on criminal case at consultations of a management of the organ of inquiry, at meetings with operative workers and, finally, independently;
– The analysis of a parity of the received proofs and their sufficiency with signs of the crime specified in a disposition of the criminal law;
– Decision removal about attraction of the person (persons) as convicted and the decision of a question on a preventive punishment.
IV stage – the basic investigation:
– Indicting convicted and its interrogation;
– Check of all arguments convicted (oral or stated in the record of interrogation, statements and petitions) by carrying out of investigatory actions or a summer residence of commissions for carrying out of operatively-search actions. The given check is spent throughout all time before the investigation termination when constantly there are two versions on business – protection and charges;
– Studying of the person convicted (interrogations of relatives and acquaintances, reclamation of help data, reclamation of characteristics from a residence, works or studies, data from former places of work, a finding in the places of confinement etc., carrying out of judicial-psychiatric or judicial-psychological examinations in case of need);
– Carrying out of investigatory actions with participation convicted (convicted), directed on proving of its guilt;
– Revealing by carrying out of investigatory actions or operatively-search actions of other episodes of criminal activity and other accomplices of a crime;
– Carrying out of remedial activity, investigatory actions and operatively-search actions for revealing, neutralisation and elimination of the factors counteracting preliminary investigation;
– The decision of questions on satisfaction or the proved dissatisfaction of all petitions and the statements brought by all participants of criminal case, including both written, and oral;
– A final analysis of all received proofs on criminal case taking into account estimation rules: the relevancy, an admissibility, reliability and as a whole on proving of their sufficiency;
– The analysis of a parity of the received proofs and their sufficiency with signs of the crime specified in a disposition of the criminal law;
– Definitive removal of the decision about attraction of the person (persons) as the convicted;
– Acceptance of measures under the prevention of crimes.
V stage – finishing:
– The announcement to litigants of the decision on the termination of manufacture of investigatory actions and the beginning of acquaintance with criminal case materials;
– Acquaintance with criminal case materials;
– Performance of petitions and statements by results of acquaintance with criminal case materials;
– A summer residence of commissions or decision-making on maintenance of safety of participants of the criminal trial at a stage of end of investigation of criminal case and a proceeding stage;
– Tracing of passage of criminal case to the public prosecutor and in court.
In summary we come to conclusions, that general provisions of a criminalistic technique of investigation are a theoretical basis of formation of a patrimonial (group) and specific technique of investigation of malfeasances owing to application of the general criminalistic categories, criminalistic means at proving of circumstances of a crime and applied use of the general technique of investigation. From this follows, that investigation of malfeasances contains three levels of a technique in system unity – the general, patrimonial and private, each of which bears the loading and carries out the functions on an establishment of circumstances of act and proving of guilt of the criminal (criminals). At the same time a role of the specified techniques much more, than investigation of one private crime. With their help and at domination of the general technique there can be established facts of fulfilment of other crimes, new structures are revealed, serial crimes are analysed, signs of the crimes having latent character, etc. are found out. All it allows to speak about prospects of development of each of subsystems of a technique of investigation of crimes and as a whole systems of a criminalistic technique. Supplementing each other, the general, patrimonial and private techniques have the object of research and practical use in activity of investigatory services, including at investigation of malfeasances.
<< | >>
A source: Halikov Asljam Nailevich. THEORY And PRACTICE of REVEALING And INVESTIGATION of MALFEASANCES (CRIMINALISTIC ASPECT). 2005

More on topic 2.1. General provisions of a criminalistic technique of investigation in structure of investigation of malfeasances:

  1. Halikov Asljam Nailevich. the THEORY And PRACTICE of REVEALING And INVESTIGATION of MALFEASANCES (CRIMINALISTIC ASPECT), 2005
  2. Chapter 5. Criminalistic ways of revealing and elimination of the circumstances promoting fulfilment of malfeasances, in the course of preliminary investigation
  3. Chapter 2. Problems of formation of theoretical and practical bases of a technique of revealing and investigation of malfeasances
  4. 4.1. Typical forms of counteraction to investigation of malfeasances and ways of their revealing
  5. Chapter 4. Problems of revealing and overcoming of counteraction to investigation of malfeasances
  6. Chapter 3. Features of manufacture of separate investigatory actions at investigation of malfeasances
  7. interaction of the inspector and operative divisions in the course of investigation of bribery in the presence of the intermediary at a stage Preliminary investigation
  8. Chapter 2. CRIMINALISTIC TACTICS of USE of MEDICAL KNOWLEDGE In INVESTIGATION of CRIMES AGAINST PERSON
  9. Concept of criminalistic maintenance of investigation mnogoepizodnyh crimes investigatory-operative groups and their classifications
  10. ž 2. Concept and the maintenance Criminalistic maintenance of investigation of criminal cases at the conclusion of the pre-judicial cooperation agreement
  11. Criminalistic aspects of activity of the head of the organ of inquiry on the organisation of investigatory-operative group and its functioning in the course of investigation mnogoepizodnyh unevident crimes
  12. CHAPTER 2. Criminalistic bases of planning of activity of investigatory-operative group at investigation mnogoepizodnyh crimes
  13. ž 2. Substantive provisions of tactics of investigatory experiment at a stage of preliminary investigation
  14. 3.3. Criminalistic aspects of manufacture of investigatory actions in the course of investigation mnogoepizodnyh crimes participants of investigatory-operative group
  15. Chapter 3. Maintenance of independence and impartiality of arbitrators at a legal investigation in joint structure
  16. ž 2.1. Problems of conduct of investigation in the general order
  17. BASTRYGIN ARTEM SERGEEVICH. CRIMINALISTIC MAINTENANCE of INVESTIGATION mnogoepizodnyh of AFFAIRS with investigatory-OPERATIVE GROUP. The dissertation On competition of a scientific degree of the master of laws. Krasnodar 2018, 2018