Authenticity in Criminal Law, Criminalistics and Forensic Science
https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2022-4-41-58
Abstract
The authenticity of products, documents and some other objects is of paramount importance in all areas of human activity. Illicit manufacturing of the counterfeit goods, documents, money, and a number of other objects entails legal liability, including criminal.
The questions about authenticity are commonly put before experts when appointing several forensic examinations: handwriting, traceological, commodity, materials, substances and products analysis. The techniques for forensic expert authenticity verification of a significant part of the objects require further improvement.
The article reviews the objects, the forgery or falsification of which entails criminal liability, as well as the methods to establish the authenticity in criminalistics and forensic science. The authors also analyze the features of scientific substantiation of conclusions about authenticity in forensic examinations, and the questions of the evaluation of the expert opinions that resolved the issue in criminal cases. The article provides some examples of unique authenticity studies from the history of forensic science, as well as data on some contemporary studies of rare cultural objects. The authors highlight the need to further develop forensic methods that have become relevant concerning new objects known to contain deliberately false information.
About the Authors
A. Y. Asnis
Law Office “Asnis & Partners” of the Moscow City Bar Association
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Asnis Alexander Yakovlevich – Doctor of Law, Director of Law Office
121099, Moscow
S. N. Khaziev
The Russian Federal Centre of Forensic Science of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Khaziev Shamil Nikolaevich – Doctor of Law, Associate Professor, Principal Researcher at the Forensic Research Methodology Department
109028, Moscow
References
1. Ustiugova E.N. About “Historical” and “Ontological” Senses of the Correlation of Authenticity and Imitation. Studia Culturale. 2015. No. 26. P. 167–178. (In Russ.).
2. Krestovnikov O.A. The Legal Category of Authenticity. Current Perspectives. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2017. Vol. 12. No. 3. P. 62–77. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2017-12-3-62-77
3. Krestovnikov O.A. The Legal Category of Authenticity. An Attempt at Definition. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2017. Vol. 12. No. 4. P. 12–17. (In Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2017-12-4-12-17
4. Bertillon A., Chervin A. Anthropologie metrique: ́ conseils pratiques aux missionnaires scientifiques sur la maniere de mesurer, de photog ̀ - raphier et de decrire des sujets vivants et des ́ pieces anatomiques: anthropome ̀ trie, photogra ́ - phie metrique, portrait descriptif, craniome ́ trie ́ . Paris: Imprimerie Nationale, 1909. 228 p.
5. Gross G. A Guide for Forensic Investigators as a System of Criminalistics. Moscow: LeksEst, 2002. 1088 p. (In Russ.).
6. Lokar E. Guide on Forensic Science / Translated from English by S.V. Poznyshev and N.V. Terziev; S.P. Mitrichev (ed.). Moscow: Yurizdat, 1941. 544 p. (In Russ.).
7. Black D.A. Forgery Above a Genuine Signature. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 1960. Vol. 50. No. 6. P. 585–590.
8. A Consolidated Catalog of Art Forgeries. Moscow: Reestr kul’turnykh tsennostei, 2016. 206 p. (In Russ.).
9. Lewes T., Pemberton E. Forged Stamps: How to Detect Them. Edinburgh: Colston & Son, 1863. 36 p.
10. Locard E. Letruquage des timbres-poste par l’acide sulfhydrique. Lyon: Joannès Desvigne, 1936. 7 p.
11. Locard E. Vieux timbres de France. Perpignan: Socie te ge ne rale de philate lie, 1943. 146 p.
12. Locard E. Manuel du philatèliste. Paris: Payot, 1942. 259 p.
13. Gro U. Forensic Philately: The Science of Stamp Authentication. ChemTexts. 2018. Vol. 4. No. 4. P. 1–14.
14. Mitrichev V.S., Khrustalev V.N. The Basics of Forensic Analysis of Materials, Substances and Products. St. Petersburg: Piter, 2003. 591 p. (In Russ.).
15. Fedorov A.N., Bocharov G.G., Rozenblat I.E. Expert Research of Metal and Alloy Products. The Main Methods and Techniques. Examples of Research: Textbook. Moscow: RFCFS, 2018. 334 p. (In Russ.).
16. Khrustalev V.N., Lobacheva G.K., Kairgaliev D.V., Vasil’ev D.V. Forensic Analysis of Substances, Materials and Products. Mocow: Sirius, 2019. 444 p. (In Russ.).
17. Shlepov Yu.A. Traceological Identification of Mass-produced Products and Machinery Used for Their Manufacture. Programmed and Situational Techniques of Traceological Research. The Collection of Scientific Works. Issue. 37. Moscow: VNIISE, 1979. P. 57–71. (In Russ.).
18. Mailis N.P. The Modern Approaches at Research of Products of Mass Manufacture. Jurisprudencija. 2005. Vol. 66 (58). P. 40–45. (In Russ.).
19. Charlier P., Poupon J., Eb A., De Mazancourt P., Gilbertf T., et al. The “Relics of Joan of Arc”: A Forensic Multidisciplinary Analysis. Forensic Science International. 2010. Vol. 194. No. 1–3. P. 9–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2009.09.006
20. Glatz C. CSI Mummy: Vatican Experts Use Forensic Science to Unravel Mysteries. America. The Jesuit Review. January 23. 2015. https://www.americamagazine.org/issue/csi-mummyvatican-experts-use-forensic-science-unravelmysteries
21. Nickell J. Detecting Forgery: Forensic Investigation of Documents. Kentucky: The University Press of Kentucky, 1996. 228 p.
Review
For citations:
Asnis A.Y., Khaziev S.N. Authenticity in Criminal Law, Criminalistics and Forensic Science. Theory and Practice of Forensic Science. 2022;17(4):41-58. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30764/1819-2785-2022-4-41-58
Views:
605
Email this article 