The Russian Criminal Procedure Code is undergoing necessary revisions, improving certain procedures. The current system of investigation activities provides fairly well for collection of evidence when investigating a crime. However, some procedures require optimization. Verifying evidence on site has been groundlessly neglected by legislators since the effective date of the current Criminal Procedure Code. This emphasizes the feasibility issue of this investigation activity. The wording of the respective clause in the Russian Criminal Procedure Code does not give a clear-cut and full picture of the essence or purposes of this investigation activity, besides it falls short of regulating the specific features of the procedure, which could legitimize it under any circumstances. Pending also are issues of search possibilities, insurance of legitimacy of verifying evidence on site in a house, impoundment of articles, found on site while verifying evidence, etc. These discrepancies result in non-uniform interpretation of provisions in clause 194 of the Russian Criminal Procedure Code and hamper implementation of investigation activity as a means of obtaining evidence in penal cases.
verifying evidence on site, investigation activity, process and conditions of procedure, discrepancies, proof, evidence
1. Centrov E. E. O suti sledstvennogo deystviya «proverka pokazaniy na meste» // Zakonnost'. 2013. № 10. S. 50-55.
2. Belousov V. I., Natura A. I. Proverka pokazaniy na meste v hode predvaritel'nogo sledstviya: ucheb.-prakt. posobie. M.: COKR MVD Rossii, 2008.
3. Yablokov N. P. Kriminalistika: uchebnik. 4-e izd. M.: Yurist', 2014.
4. Rossinskiy S. B. Sootnoshenie rezul'tatov neverbal'nyh sledstvennyh i sudebnyh deystviy s pokazaniyami po ugolovnomu delu: vozmozhnye varianty resheniya problemy // Rossiyskiy sledovatel'. 2013. № 17. S. 4-9.
5. Osavelyuk E. A., Antipov O. S. Proverka pokazaniy na meste kak sledstvennoe deystvie: problema sostoyatel'nosti v sovremennom ugolovno-processual'nom zakonodatel'stve Rossii // Voprosy sovremennoy yurisprudencii: sb. statey po materialam XLVIII mezhdunar. nauch.-prakt. konf. Novosibirsk: SibAK, 2015. № 4 (46). S. 44-49.
6. Sheyfer S. A. Dokazatel'stva i dokazyvanie po ugolovnym delam: problemy teorii i pravovogo regulirovaniya. M.: NORMA, 2009.
7. Zazhickiy V. I. Nuzhno li sledstvennoe deystvie s «uchastiem» kukly? // Rossiyskaya yusticiya. 2012. № 9. S. 31-34.
8. Bezlepkin B. T. Ugolovnyy process v voprosah i otvetah: ucheb. posobie. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoy sistemy «Konsul'tantPlyus».
9. Davydov M. V. Proverka pokazaniy na meste kak sredstvo poznaniya obstoyatel'stv sovershennogo prestupleniya: avtoref. dis. … kand. yurid. nauk. M., 2011.
10. Tret'yak N. N., Pysina G. A. Naznachenie i poryadok provedeniya situacionnoy ekspertizy // Izbrannye voprosy sudebno-medicinskoy ekspertizy. Habarovsk , 2002. № 5. C. 13-15.
11. Zemcova S. I. Cel' i zadachi proverki pokazaniy na meste pri rassledovanii prestupleniy, svyazannyh s nezakonnym oborotom narkotikov // Sovremennoe pravo. 2015. № 8. Dostup iz sprav.-pravovoy sistemy «Konsul'tantPlyus».
