СТРУКТУРА ЧАСТНОЙ КРИМИНАЛИСТИЧЕСКОЙ МЕТОДИКИ: ИСТОРИЯ ФОРМИРОВАНИЯ И ПЕРСПЕКТИВЫ РАЗВИТИЯ. ЧАСТЬ II

Ilona Anatolievna MAKARENKO; Alexey Alekseevich EKSARHOPULO; Ruslan Ildarovich ZAYNULLIN

Authors

Ilona Anatolievna MAKARENKO Bashkir State University
Alexey Alekseevich EKSARHOPULO Bashkir State University
Ruslan Ildarovich ZAYNULLIN Bashkir State University

Keywords:

forensic methodology, historical background, structure of the private forensic methodology, investigation of certain types of crimes, formation of forensic methodology, investigation stages

Abstract

Contemporary forensic methodology completes the course of forensics, giving its recommendations exclusively to the subjects of preliminary investigation and taking its own place in the system of science with its relatively isolated subject and cognitive means. Among its basic provisions, first of all one can distinguish the structure of private forensic methodology. To-day, it is obvious that the study and analysis of legal science historical achievements and the practice of fighting crime, which have become the basis for solving preliminary investigation tasks, and, on this basis, the definition of prospects for the private forensic methodology development are urgent. The basic element of any private (typical) method of investigation is its structure, because it expresses the most rational sequence of the investigator’s work in a criminal case. The structure has a direct practical meaning; it assists the implementation of theoretical provisions and practical recommendations of science, ensuring the most effective organization of investigative work.

Author Biographies

Ilona Anatolievna MAKARENKO, Bashkir State University

Doctor of Law, Professor, Director of the Institute of Law, Head of the Chair of Forensics of the Institute of Law of the Bashkir State University, Ufa, Russia

Alexey Alekseevich EKSARHOPULO, Bashkir State University

Doctor of Law, Professor, Professor of the Chair of Forensics of the Institute of Law of the Bashkir State University, Ufa, Russia

Ruslan Ildarovich ZAYNULLIN, Bashkir State University

Candidate of Sciences (Law), Deputy Direc-tor for Science of the Institute of Law, Assistant Professor of the Chair of Forensics of the Bashkir State University, Ufa, Russia

References

Белкин Р.С. Курс криминалистики: общая теория криминалистики. В 3 т. Т. 1. М. : Юристъ, 1997.

Гросс Г. Руководство для судебных следователей как система криминалистики. 4-е изд., доп. СПб, 1908.

Возгрин И.А. Криминалистическая методика расследования преступлений. Минск, 1983.

Линовский В.А. Опыт исторических розысканий о следственном уголовном судопроизвод-стве в России. М. : «ЛексЭст», 2001.

Анушат Э. Искусство раскрытия преступлений и законы логики. М. : ЛексЭст, 2001.

Чернова Н. После пыток. Как живут те, кто победил в Страсбургском суде, и те, по вине которых Россия там проиграла // Новая Газета. 2008. 31 июля.

Ларин А.М. Презумпция невиновности. М. : Наука, 1982. 8. Владимиров Л.Е. Учение об уголовных доказательствах. Тула : Автограф, 2000.

Вышинский А.Я. Теория судебных доказательств в советском праве. М. : Госюриздат, 1950.

Hans Gross. Criminal investigation: a practical textbook for magistrates, police officers and lawyers. Gale, Making of Modern Law, 2010.

Joachim Ciupka, Gunter Spies. Die gedankliche Arbeit des Kriminalisten bei der Rekonstruktion von Ereignisorten. Fachhochschule für Verwaltung und Rechtspflege Berlin, 2008.