Ensuring the Reliability of Conclusions in the Expert's Statement in the Course of a Forensic Construction Investigation
https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2017-12-3-78-84
Abstract
The appointment and production of forensic investigation is one of the most common procedural actions in modern legal proceedings, along with the evaluation of the expert witness statement by the body (person) that ordered the examination. The article deals with a number of problems associated with evaluating of the expert witness statement reflecting the progress and results of a forensic construction investigation. Reliability is the most complex and contradictory criterion in the evaluation of expert testimony. Taking into account the courts' constantly growing need for construction forensics expert services, on the one hand, and insufficient elaboration of this assessment criterion for this kind of expert evidence, on the other hand, the authors explore the subject in depth and present their interpretation of the notion of «reliability», as applied to the evaluation of construction forensics expert statements.
About the Authors
A. Yu. Butyrin
The Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation;
National Research Moscow State University of Civil Engineering
Russian Federation
Butyrin Andrei Yur’evich – Doctor of Law, Head of the Laboratory of Construction Forensics of the RFCFS of the Russian Ministry of Justice, professor at the Department of Construction and Property Management, Moscow State University of Civil Engineering
Russian Federation
Butyrin Andrei Yur’evich – Doctor of Law, Head of the Laboratory of Construction Forensics of the RFCFS of the Russian Ministry of Justice, professor at the Department of Construction and Property Management, Moscow State University of Civil Engineering
Z. V. Trifonova
The Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation;
The Peoples' Friendship University of Russia (RUDN University)
Russian Federation
Trifonova Zlata Valer’evna – State Forensic Examiner at the Laboratory of Construction Forensics of the RFCFS of the Russian Ministry of Justice, Master’s student at the Department of Forensic Expert Activity in Law Enforcement, RUDN University
Russian Federation
Trifonova Zlata Valer’evna – State Forensic Examiner at the Laboratory of Construction Forensics of the RFCFS of the Russian Ministry of Justice, Master’s student at the Department of Forensic Expert Activity in Law Enforcement, RUDN University
References
1. Orlov Yu.K. The expert’s conclusion and assessment (in criminal cases). Textbook. Мoscow: Yurist, 1995. 64 p. (In Russ.)
2. Orlov Yu.K. Modern problems of proof and use of special knowledge in criminal proceedings. Moscow: Prospekt, 2017. 216 p. (In Russ.)
3. Galkin V.M. Means of Evidence in Criminal Procedure. Part 2. The expert’s conclusion. Moscow: TsNIISE, 1968. 95 p. (In Russ.)
4. Borodin S.V., Paliashvili A.Ya. Questions of theory and practice of forensic expertise. Moscow: Legal literature, 1963. 180 p. (In Russ.)
5. Rossinskaya E.R. Forensics in criminal, civil, arbitration proceedings. Moscow: Right and Law, 1996. 224 p. (In Russ.)
6. Pedenchuk A.K. Problems of ensuring the reliability of the conclusion of a forensic expert. Moscow: VNIISE, 1992. 148 p. (In Russ.)
7. Eisman A.A. The expert’s conclusion. Structure and scientific justification. Moscow: Legal literature, 1967. 152 p. (In Russ.)
8. Zhizhina M.V. About the activities of the court in evaluating expert opinions. Proceedings of the 4th International scientific-practical conference “Theory and practice of forensic examination in modern conditions” (Moscow, 30–31 January, 2013). Moscow: Prospect. P. 112–115. (In Russ.)
9. Yakovlev Y.M. Fundamentals of psychology forensic activities. Questions of psychology and logic in forensic activities: proceedings of VNIISE. Issue 30. Moscow: VNIISE, 1977. P. 17– 21. (In Russ.)
10. Eisman A.A. The expert’s conclusion in the system of forensic evidence. Doctoral thesis (Law). Moscow, 1965. 511 p. (In Russ.)
11. Arsen’ev V.D. Truth, reliability and validity in forensic investigations on civil cases. The problems of the theory of forensic examination: proceedings of VNIISE. Issue 39. Moscow, 1979. P. 3–48. (In Russ.)
12. Cherdantsev A.F. Logical-linguistic phenomena in law: monograph. Moscow: Norma, Infra-M, 2012. 320 p. (In Russ.)
13. Butyrin A.Yu. Theory and practice of forensic science construction and technical investigations. Moscow: Gorodets, 2006. 544 p. (In Russ.)
14. Borodina E.A. Legal status and forensic meaning of source data in forensic expert studies. Doctoral thesis (Law). Moscow, 1987. 453 p. (In Russ.)
15. Belkin R.S. Criminal science: problems, trends, prospects. Public and private theories. Moscow: Legal literature, 1987. 272 p. (In Russ.)
16. Butyrin A.Yu., Sokolov Yu.B., Stativa E.B., Grabbe T.A., Khisheva O.I. Determination of the technical feasibility and development of options for the transformation of administrative and warehouse buildings in accordance with the conditions specified by the court. Methodological recommendations for the conduct of cost and conversion studies in the manufacture of judicial construction technical expertise. Moscow: RFCFS, 2016. P. 265–309. (In Russ.)
17. Butyrin A.Yu, Chudievich A.R., Lukovkina O.V. The definition of types, volumes, quality and cost of construction and installation and special works for the erection, repair (reconstruction) of construction sites. Collection of methodical recommendations for the production of judicial construction and technical expertise. Moscow: RFCFS, 2012. P. 7–54. (In Russ.)
18. Butyrin A.Yu. Determination of the technical feasibility and development of options for transforming a residential house as an element of home ownership in accordance with the conditions set by the court. Collection of methodical recommendations on the production of judicial construction and technical expertise. Moscow: RFCFS, 2012. P. 55–96. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Butyrin A.Yu., Trifonova Z.V. Ensuring the Reliability of Conclusions in the Expert's Statement in the Course of a Forensic Construction Investigation. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2017;12(3):78-84. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2017-12-3-78-84
Views:
9365
Email this article 