As any evidence, expert decision is to be examined in details on the subject of proving according to the common rules of evidence rating. The first point is to be defined - evidence admissibility by checking the procedural preparation order, appointing and providing examination and results registration. As a rule, the conformity examination of the expert decision of admissibility in court and investigatory practices doesn’t cause difficulties. The determination of the expert level of proficiency, plentitude and objectiveness of expert decision, scientific value. Absence of specialized training in examination the subject of proving can be explained by the complexity and specificity of studying writing expert decision evaluation can be done by introducing into practice the criteria of expert competence (first-rate, second-rate, superior). The most difficult inexpert evaluation is scientific validity. Nevertheless, the expert can be called for interrogation, but it’s usually reduced to explanation of the terms and scientific status. So, we propose to enact in the legislation in force some norms which allow investigator to consult specialists such as teaching staff at higher educational establishment training field criminalists. Involving specialists significantly increase proving value of the examination.
expert decision, admissibility, relevance, proving, expert competence, justification, reliability of the results of the examination
1. Mel'nik S. L. Aktual'nye voprosy ekspertnoy iniciativy: dis.. kand. yurid. nauk. Chelyabinsk, 2005. S. 170, 171.
2. Orlov Yu. K. Zaklyuchenie eksperta i ego ocenka po ugolovnym delam. M.: Yurist, 1995. S. 43.
3. Zinin A. M., Maylis N. P. Sudebnaya ekspertiza: uchebnik. M., 2002. S. 189.
4. Shlyahov A. R. Processual'nye i organizacionnye osnovy kriminalisticheskoy ekspertizy. M., 1972. S. 76-90.
5. Rahunov R. D. Teoriya i praktika ekspertizy v sovetskom ugolovnom processe. M., 1958. S. 102.
6. Dubrovin S. V. Osnovy teorii kriminalisticheskoy diagnostiki: dis. … d-ra yurid. nauk. M., 2005. S. 171.
7. Shashkin S. B. Teoreticheskie i metodologicheskie osnovy kriminalisticheskoy ekspertizy dokumentov, vypolnennyh s pomosch'yu poligraficheskoy i orgtehniki: dis. … d-ra yurid. nauk. Saratov, 2003. S. 221.
8. Petruhin I. L. Ekspertiza kak sredstvo dokazyvaniya v sovetskom ugolovnom processe. M., 1964. S. 243.
9. Barinova O. A. Vozmozhnosti differenciacii rukopisey, vypolnennyh shodnymi materialami pis'ma // Sudebnaya ekspertiza v paradigme rossiyskoy nauki (k 85-letiyu Yu.G. Koruhova): sb. mater. 54-h kriminalisticheskih chteniy: v 2-h ch. M.: Akademiya upravleniya MVD Rossii, 2013. 388 s.
10. Belkin R. S. Kurs kriminalistiki. M., 1997. T. 3. S. 124.
11. Trosman E. A., Bezhanishvili G. S., Batygina N. A. Sposob opredeleniya davnosti vypolneniya rekvizitov v dokumentah po otnositel'nomu soderzhaniyu v shtrihah letuchih rastvoriteley / Gosudarstvennoe uchrezhdenie Rossiyskiy Federal'nyy centr sudebnoy ekspertizy pri Ministerstve yusticii Rossiyskoy Federacii. Patent Rossiyskoy Federacii na izobretenie № 2399042 ot 30.06.2009 [Elektronnyy resurs]. URL: http://bd.patent.su/2399000-2399999/pat/servl/servletb502.html (data obrascheniya: 10.10.2010).
12. Aginskiy V. N. Ustanovlenie davnosti vypolneniya shtrihov rukopisnyh tekstov: metod. rekomendacii. M.: EKC MVD Rossii, 1997. 9 s.
13. Bachurin L. V., Yudin N. V. Ustanovlenie fakta nesootvetstviya vremeni fakticheskogo vypolneniya dokumenta, date, ukazannoy v nem, metodom spektrometricheskogo issledovaniya // Ekspress-byulleten' № 27. M.: EKC GUVD po g. Moskve, 2006. S. 24-43.
14. Venevcev A. N., Sitnikov B. V. K voprosu ob opredelenii vremeni vypolneniya shtrihov past sharikovyh ruchek // Voronezhskiy advokat. Vyp. 12. Voronezh, 2009;
15. Barinova O. A. Ustanovlenie vozrasta dokumenta: vozmozhnosti i perspektivy // Organy predvaritel'nogo sledstviya v sisteme MVD Rossii: istoriya, sovremennost' i perspektivy (k 50-letiyu so dnya obrazovaniya sledstvennogo apparata v sisteme MVD Rossii: sb. mater. vseros. nauch.-prakt. konf.: v 2-h ch. Ch. 2. M.: Akademiya upravleniya MVD Rossii, 2013. 284 s.
16. Burinskiy E. F. Sudebnaya ekspertiza dokumentov, proizvodstvo ee i pol'zovanie eyu. M.: LeksEst, 2002. S. 149.
17. Zayceva E. A. Pravovoy institut sudebnoy ekspertizy v sovremennyh usloviyah. Volgograd: Izdatel'stvo Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, 2003 S. 141-156
18. Belkin A. R. Teoriya dokazyvaniya v ugolovnom sudoproizvodstve. M.: Norma, 2005. S. 363.
