Forensic Psychological Aspects of the Term “Provocation” in Criminal Proceedings
https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2020-3-19-33
Abstract
Based on the expert analysis of legal norms, using the term “provocation”, the author of the paper is trying to develop an expert concept of “provocation”, which can be used in forensic psychological and comprehensive psychological and linguistic examination. It is demonstrated that the focus of a subject’s communicative activity on incitement to commit particular actions (offer, giving or getting a reward, or readiness to do so) leading to negative consequences in the form of prosecution, is such a concept. This focus expresses as a formation of a particular mental set. The development of consent or offer to commit a specific action seem to be the psychological features of the phenomenon described in law as “to incite, incline, induce, directly or indirectly, to commit unlawful acts (provocation)”. The author proposes the questions which may be put to experts when assigning an examination or a "provocation to bribe” diagnostic complex. The expediency to conduct a comprehensive psychological and linguistic expertise when investigating crimes under articles 290, 291, 291.1 of the Russian Federation’s Criminal code in cases of suspicion that illegal actions resulted from entrapment is justified.
About the Author
T. N. Sekerazh
The Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sekerazh Tat’yana Nikolaevna – Candidate of Law, Associate Professor, Head of the Laboratory of Forensic Psychology
Moscow 109028
References
1. Zhuravlev A.L., Yurevich A.V. Psychological Factors of Corruption in Present-Day Russia. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal. 2012. Vol. 33. No. 3. P. 43–52. (In Russ.)
2. Gavrina E.E. Socio-Psychological Determinants Effecting Formation of Corrupt Behavior. Applied Legal Psychology. 2016. No. 3. P. 47–55. (In Russ.)
3. Reshetnikov M.M. Psychology of Corruption. Utopia and Dystopia. Monograph. 2 nd ed. Moscow: Yurait, 2019. 101 p. (In Russ.)
4. Kroz M.V., Ratinova N.A. Value Orientations of Corrupt Criminals. Psikhologicheskie Issledovaniya. 2018. Vol. 11. No. 61. P. 5. (In Russ.). http://psystudy.ru/index.php/num/2018v11n61/1623-kroz61.html
5. Safuanov F.S. How to Build Substantive JudicialPsychological Examination. Psychology and Law. 2017. Vol. 7. No. 1. P. 220–239. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.17759/psylaw.2017070118
6. Sitkovskaya O.D., Konysheva L.P., Kochenov M.M. New Areas of Forensic Psychology. Guidebook. Moscow: Yurlitinform, 2000. 160 p. (In Russ.)
7. Grisso T., Borum R. (eds). Evaluating Competencies. Forensic Assessments and Instruments. 2 nd ed. New York: Kluwer, 2003. 553 p.
8. Safuanov F.S. Forensic Psychology. Textbook for Academic Bachelor Program. Moscow: Yurait, 2014. 421 p. (In Russ.)
9. Safuanov F.S. Principles of Clinical Psychological Forensic Expert Science. Russian Journal of Psychiatry. 2020. No. 2. P. 39–45. (In Russ.). http://rpj.serbsky.ru/index.php/rpj/article/view/0205
10. Lebedev V.M. (ed). Commentary on the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. In 4 volumes. Vol. 1. General Part. Moscow: Yurait, 2017. 316 p. (In Russ.)
11. Kuznetsov S.A. (ed). Big Glossary of the Russian Language. Saint Petersburg: Norint, 1998. 1534 p. (In Russ.)
12. Kuznetsov V.O. “Provocation” as an Expert Term in Forensic Linguistics. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2020. Vol. 15. No. 3. P. 6–18. https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2020-3-6-18
13. Garner B.A. (ed). Black’s Law Dictionary. 8 th ed. St. Paul: Thomson/West, 2004. 1810 p.
14. LaFave W.R. The Objections to the Subjective Approach. In: LaFave W.R. Criminal Law. 4 th ed. 2003. P. 508–512.
15. Baranchikov M.N. Provocation in a Relatively Crime – the Legal Aspect of Russian and American Criminal Law. Scientific Notes of Orel State University. Series: Human and Social Sciences. 2011. No. 1 (39). P. 224–226. (In Russ.)
16. Ayusinov A.E. The Features of the Regulating the Criminal Responsibility for the Crime Provocation in Foreign Legislation. Saratov State Law Academy Bulletin. 2015. No. 6 (107). P. 148–153. (In Russ.)
17. Shmonin A.V., Semykina O.I. Provocation of Crimes by Law Enforcement Agencies: Comparative-Legal Analysis of the Russian and Foreign Legislation. Journal of Russian Law. 2013. No. 7. P. 71–81. (In Russ.)
18. Shemetova T.N. Art of Provocation and Perfect Provocateur. Observatory of Culture. 2014. No. 1. P. 11–17. (In Russ.). https://observatoria.rsl.ru/jour/article/viewFile/3/141
19. Andreeva G.M., Dontsov A.I. The Place of Interpersonal Perception in the System of Perceptive Processes and the Characteristics of Its Content. The Study of the Phenomenon of Causal Attribution. In: Kutasova T.V. (ed). Anthology of Social Psychology. Moscow: Smusl, Akademiya, 1994. P. 106–120. (In Russ.)
20. Leont’ev A.A. The Psychology of Communication. Textbook. 4 th ed. Moscow: Smysl: Akademiya, 2007. 368 p. (In Russ.)
21. Lozovskii A.V. The Semantic of the Concept of Provocation and its Derivatives in the Russian Language and English Language Psychological Leterature. Law. Economy. Psychology. 2018. No. 4 (12). P. 55–59. (In Russ.)
22. Saladukho A.S., Lazouskii A.V. Provocativeness in Internet Communication: The Problem of Concept Defining. Journal of the Belarusian State University. Philosophy and Psychology. 2019. No. 1. P. 104–109. (In Russ.). https://journals.bsu.by/index.php/philosophy/article/view/2021
23. Glukhova A.V. The Role of Provocation in Politics. Vlast’. 2016. Vol. 24. No. 3. P. 92–96. (In Russ.). https://www.isras.ru/index.php?page_id=2384&id=4038
24. Zagladin N. A Political Event. In: Semigin G. Yu. (ed). Political Encyclopedia. In 2 Volumes. Vol. 2. N–Ya. Moscow: Mysl’, 2000. P. 419–420. (In Russ.)
25. Dmitriev A.V., Sychev A.A. Provocation: SocioPhilosophical Essays. Monograph. Moscow: TsSPiM, 2017. 336 p. (In Russ.)
26. Tumskii S.V. Provocation as Social Action: Its Definition in the Context of Cross-Disciplinary Analysis. Sociodynamics 2017. No. 8. P. 1–11. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25136/24097144.2017.8.23349
27. Antsupov A.Ya., Shipilov A.I. A Conflictologist’s Dictionary. 4 th ed. Moscow: Prospekt, 2020. 536 p. (In Russ.)
28. Issers O.S. The Strategy of Speech Provocation in a Public Dialogue. Russian Language and Linguistic Theory. 2009. No. 2 (18). P. 92–104. (In Russ.). http://rjano.ruslang.ru/ru/archive/2009-2/92-104
29. Vlasov М. Man’s Psychology. Provocation. 19.12.2017. https://psichel.ru/provokatsiya/
30. Donath J.S. Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community. Smith M.A., Kollock P. (eds). Communities in Cyberspace. L., N.Y.: Routledge, 1999. P. 29–59.
31. Stepanov V. Provocative Speech Genres as a Means of Indirect Communication, Its Linguistic Entity and Analysis. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2014. No. 4 (36). P. 89–99. (In Russ.)
32. Vaske E.V. The Psychology of Interrogation of Minor Offenders and Victims of Sexual Abuse. Moscow: Genezis, 2014. 312 p. (In Russ.)
33. Pavlova N.D. The Mechanisms and Means of a Subject’s Discursive Influence. In: Zhuravlev A.L., Pavlova N.D. (eds). Mental Pressure: Mechanisms, Strategies, Means of Counteracting. Moscow: In-t psikhologii RAN, 2012. P. 53–73. (In Russ.)
34. Farrelly F., Brandsma J.M. Provocative Therapy. 5 th ed. Meta Publications, 1989. 195 p.
35. Enin A.V. Psychology of Provocative Pedagogy: Some Aspects of Theory and Methodology. Tambov University Review. Series: Humanities. 2009. No. 2 (70). P. 252–255. (In Russ.)
36. Morozova E.A. Psychotherapeutic Potential of Provocative Methods and Forms of Social and Psychological Influence (on the Example of Avant-garde Art). Consulting Psychology and Psychotherapy. 2005. Vol. 13. No. 4 (47). P. 137–153. (In Russ.). https://psyjournals.ru/mpj/2005/n4/1763.shtml
37. Dotsenko E.L. The Psychology of Manipulation: Phenomena, Mechanisms, Protection. Saint Petersburg: Rech’, 2003. 304 p. (In Russ.)
38. Pankratov V.N. Manipulations in Communication and Their Neutralizing. Practical Guide. Moscow: In-t Psikhoterapii, 2001. 208 p. (In Russ.)
39. Sheinov V.P. Concealed Manipulation of a Person (Psychology of Manipulation). Moscow: AST, 2001. 848 p. (In Russ.)
40. Grachev G.V., Mel’nik I.K. Manipulation of a Person: Organization, Ways and Technologies of Informational and Psychological Influence. 2 nd ed. Moscow: Algoritm, 2002. 288 p. (In Russ.)
41. Sidorenko E.V. Training of Influence and Resistance to It. Saint Petersburg: Rech’, 2004. 256 p. (In Russ.)
42. Volkova O.S. Communicative Provocation as a Strategy of Destructive Behaviour in Every-Day Conflict. Science Journal of VolSU. Linguistics. 2014. No. 5 (24). P. 49–55. (In Russ.). http://doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2014.5.6
43. Grinenko G.V. Sacred Texts and Sacred Communication. Logic-Semiotic Analysis of Verbal Magic. Moscow: Novyi vek, 2000. 448 p. (In Russ.)
44. Shteba A.A. Linguistic Features of Provocation. Litera. 2017. No. 1. P. 120–128. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.7256/2409-8698.2017.1.19580
45. Stepanov V.N. Confrontation in Social and Mass Communication. Monograph. Saint Petersburg: Roza mira, 2008. 268 p. (In Russ.)
46. Latynov V.V. Psychology of Communicative Influence. Moscow: Institut psikhologii RAN, 2013. 368 p. (In Russ.)
47. Izotova T.M., Kuznetsov V.O., Plotnikova A.M. Methodology of Forensic Linguistic Analysis in Criminal Insult Investigations. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2016. No. 1 (41). P. 92–98. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/64/1819-2785-2016-1-92-98
48. Kukushkina O.V., Safonova Yu.A., Sekerazh T.N. Methodology of Conducting a Forensic Psychological and Linguistic Examination of Materials in Cases Related to Countering Extremism and Terrorism. Moscow: RFCFS, 2014. 98 p. (In Russ.)
49. Plotnikova A.M., Kuznetsov V.O., Sazhenin I.I., Akulenko E.V. Boitsov A.A., Gubarenkova E.O., Kryuk E.K., Kumkova T.N., Portnova V.B., Chumakova E.N. Semantic Analysis in Forensic Linguistics. Handbook / S.A. Smirnova (ed). Moscow: RFCFS, 2018. 136 p. (In Russ.)
Review
For citations:
Sekerazh T.N. Forensic Psychological Aspects of the Term “Provocation” in Criminal Proceedings. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2020;15(3):19-33. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2020-3-19-33
Views:
3369
Email this article 