1 / 11

Legal and Criminological Expertise Challenges in Judicial Procedure

Explore the complexities of different expert findings in forensic evidence and the impact on judicial decisions in criminal cases. Learn about the types of expertise and the significance of subsequent expert examinations. Delve into real-world examples demonstrating the importance of expert testimony and the role of institutions in ensuring justice. This discussion is part of the International Student Conference on Safety in Local Communities, held in Podgorica on April 4, 2018.

margaretgrove
Download Presentation

Legal and Criminological Expertise Challenges in Judicial Procedure

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Repeated or super-expert examination. Almina košuta II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  2. 1. Introduction • The modern judicial procedure is mostly and mainly based on forensic evidence; • Forensics as a new and modern science is a major challenge for the judiciary, and primarily for the prosecution; • The question is when in some investigations, we have two different expert findings on one of the same types of traces that must be accessed by a subsequent, or (super) expert examination. The current issues in this area are raised in the question of: Who to entrust later, expertise and why? What are the criteria for determining an institution? II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  3. By definition, the criminalistic technique is a branch of criminology that finds, adapts and modifies the methods of fundamental science, for the purpose of resolving offenses and identifying their perpetrators; • Persons who possess unquestioned expertise and skills get extraordinary power.Engaged by the judiciary, protected by the authority of science, give evidence that the participants in the judiciary simply can not understand; • How should the competent prosecutor, the investigating judge and the president of the panel, act in such cases, or what kind of findings should he accept and who to reject? II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  4. 2. Types of expertise • The following types of expertise can be performed according to the order in which they are carried out: • 1. first; • 2. supplementary; • 3. re-examination. • The first expertise, is an artificial examination of some materials for the first time. • In case the testimony of the first or primary expert contains certain defects, which must be removed before the final assessment of the expert findings is reached, then it is recourse to additional expert judgment. II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  5. In cases where the shortcomings in the expert's findings and opinions, are such that they can not be remedied by a supplementary hearing, then the court is obliged to order a new; • In practice, this dilemma is solved in such a way that the new expertise is entrusted to an institution that will designate a team of experts of the appropriate profession. Thus, in some court cases in Montenegro, the judiciary engaged the appropriate institutions in Ljubljana, Belgrade and Zagreb. • When two experts have different opinions on the same criminal offense, it is expected that both of them will provide clear, scientifically valid and verifiable methodologies that reinforce their thinking. After that, the court distorts relevant facts from their antagonistic opinions. II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  6. 3. Example • It is interesting to indicate another example of the conduct of the court and parties in the proceedings in cases where we have a disagreement between the expert witness in the examination of the same traces from the scene of the criminal offense. It's the Oscars Pistorius case. • Picture 1. Forensics engaged by the defense of Oscar Pistorius, during the execution of a transgelda door from the toilet of his villa. II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  7. 4. Example • At the end of this paper, which deals with various cases in which the post-super scrutiny was used to determine the key facts, it is interesting to look at the practice of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), as a state with strong scientific and professional institutions. • It is a matter of Đorđe Martinović, who is on May 1, 1985 in difficult conditions, he came to the Gnjilane Hospital (then the Socialist Autonomous Province of Kosovo) with severe injuries to the outgoing colon (anus). II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  8. 5. Subsequent- superexpertise in cases of intangible expertise • Historical expertise are largely represented in the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia in The Hague. • This court hired experts to determine the historical circumstances under which the conflict in the former Yugoslavia began, that is, with the help of an expert in the field of history, who determined, who first started the conflict. And there's a problem here! • However, it should not be forgotten that the expertise is only one of the forms of proof and it is not the least problematic. When incorporating the expert's findings and opinions into evidence, the modern scientific community must be more actively involved in this issue. II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  9. Generally speaking, forensic science is not exact, and for this reason the appearance of uncertainty and / or ambiguity in the work of expert witnesses is a reality that must be accepted. • There is no need to generalize a problem that often charts the controversy about the judicial use of expert knowledge. II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  10. Conclusion • What kind of investigators are in a country, this is their criminal justice ... We ask the investigator a lot of knowledge that is not legal; we demand from him that he possesses an enviable level of forensic knowledge, that he can help himself in the event of an emergency and knows what and how he can ask the doctors, chemists, physicists and microscopics; we demand from him to be somewhat understood in weapons, in trading bookkeeping, in many technical things, various craftsmen and all possible experts, we require the investigator to understand himself in a series of skilful (drawing, modeling, recording), to get to know all the possible criminal tricks and thousands of other things, which are looking for a thousand-odd variety of criminal cases. II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

  11. II. International student conference „Safety in local communities-legal and criminological perspectives“’, Podgorica., 4 April 2018

More Related