Concerning the Relationship between Different Types of Identification and Evidentiary Value of Expert Findings
https://doi.org/10.30764/64/1819-2785-2017-12-3-28-32
Abstract
The article discusses the issues of identification in terms of its types, the relationship between them, the relevancy of expert findings and their evidentiary value.
About the Author
N. P. Maylis
V.Ya. Kikot' Moscow University of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Maylis Nadezhda Pavlovna — Doctor of Law, Professor, Distinguished Scientist of the Russian Federation, Professor at the Department of Weapons and Trace Evidence Analysis
Russian Federation
Maylis Nadezhda Pavlovna — Doctor of Law, Professor, Distinguished Scientist of the Russian Federation, Professor at the Department of Weapons and Trace Evidence Analysis
References
1. Maylis. N.P. Theory and practice of forensic examination in proof. Moscow: Yuniti-Dana, 2015. 264 p. (In Russ.).
2. Belking R.S. Course of criminalistics. Moscow: Yuniti. 2001. 837 p. (In Russ.).
3. Min’kovskii G.M., Yablokov N.P. Review of the textbook “Criminalistics” under editorship of. A.I. Vinberg and S.P. Mitrichev, 1950.Sotsialisticheskaya zakonnost’ = Socialist legality. 1951. No 7. P. 81–87. (In Russ.).
4. Vinberg A.I. Criminalistic examination in the Soviet criminal trial. Moscow: Gosyurizdat, 1956. 220 p. (In Russ.).
5. Koldin V.Ya. Identification by production of criminalistic examinations. Moscow: Gosyurizdat, 1957.152 p. (In Russ.).
6. Sedova T.A. Problems of methodology and practice of nonconventional criminalistic identification. Leningrad: Leningrad University, 1986. 105 p. (In Russ.).
7. Koldin V.Ya. Forensic identification. Moscow: LeksEst, 2002. 528 p. (In Russ.).
8. Dubrovin S.V. Terminology, conceptual framework and other characteristics of criminalistic identification and criminalistic diagnostics. Moscow: MPGU, 2009. 33 p. (In Russ.).
9. Mitrichev S.P., Selivanov N.A., Shalamov M.P. (eds) Criminalistics. Moscow: Legal literature, 1973, 536 p. (In Russ.).
10. Segai M.Ya. Methodology of forensic identification. Kiev: MVD USSR, 1970, 254 p. (In Russ.).
11. Mitrichev V.S. Questions of forensic identification. Proceedings of TsNIISE. Issue 2. Moscow: TsNIISE. 1970. P. 94–144. (In Russ.).
12. Min’kovskii G.M, Ratinov A.R., Tanasevich V.G., Eisman A.A. (eds). Theory of proofs in soviet criminal trial. Moscow: Legal literature, 1973. 736 p. (In Russ.).
13. Brainin M. Criminalistic. Moscow: Legal literature, 1968. 687 p. (In Russ.).
14. Kolmakov V.P. Criminalistic identification as a way of proof in criminal and civil legal proceedings. Criminalistics and forensic examination = Kriminalistika i sudebnaya ekspertiza. 1966. Issue 3. P. 91–101. (In Russ.).
15. Belkin R.S., Zuikov G.G. (eds) Criminalistic. Vol. 1. Moscow: VSh MVD USSR, 1969. 376 p. (In Russ.).
16. Koldin V.Ya. Identification at investigation of crimes. Moscow: Legal literature, 1978. 144 p. (In Russ.).
17. Maylis. N.P., Odinochkina T.F., Sokolova O.A. Tracology. Moscow: Shchit-M, 2011. 328 p. (In Russ.).
18. Maylis. N.P. My profession is forensic expert. Moscow: Shchit-M, 2006. 168 p. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Maylis N.P. Concerning the Relationship between Different Types of Identification and Evidentiary Value of Expert Findings. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2017;12(3):28-32. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30764/64/1819-2785-2017-12-3-28-32
Views:
1023
Email this article 