Review

The article is devoted to refinement of legal nature of verification (clarification) of testimonies of a place as procedural way to obtain an evidence. The practice of applying this procedural action in investigating criminal proceedings is researched.

One of the reason for unequal interruption of p.1 art. 240 CPC is that legislator unreasonably uses term ’reproduction of action, situation and circumstance’ as a way of verifying statement which have importance for criminal proceed, while it’s only a prerequisites of investigative experiment.

Arguments in favor of the fact that the legislator applies the term «investigative experiment» in the sense in art. 240 CPC is completely covered by term ’verification of testimonies on a place’ if it’s objective through conduction researching actions. Under term ’researcher acts’ propose to understand not only trials into research, but also other empirical methods experimental researchobservation, measurement, compression.

Is offered to provide p.1 art.240 CPC in next version: ’For the propose of verification and specification which have main meaning establishment of circumstances of criminal proceed, investigator, prosecutor has a right to conduct investigative experiment by committing the necessary researching acts, replaying in necessary accident situation and circumstance certain occasion.

The main difference of investigative experiment, which conduct on the definitely place (first of all verification or clarification of testimonies) from investigative experience in place, which have not connection with criminal offense, doesn’t concern this procedural act and mostly located in the area of organizational and tactical provision of them. In this regard justifies the expediency to classify the «place to conduct experiment» to distinguish two of its following types: 1) an investigative experiment conducted on the place of a particular event; 2) an investigative experiment conducted in any other place designated by the investigator, where any event related to a criminal offense did not occur.

References

1. 1. Chaplynskyi K O, ’Slidchyi eksperyment yak obiekt kryminalistychnoho doslidzhennia’ [Investigator experiment as object of forensic science researches] (2011) 2 (7) Visnyk akademii mytnoi sluzhby Ukrainy 145–149 (in Ukrainian).
2. Hora I V, Kolesnik V A, ’Slidchyi eksperyment chy perevirka pokazan osoby’ [Investigator experiment or verification of a person testimonies] (2012) Visnyk Luhanskoho derzhavnoho universytetu vnutrishnikh sprav imeni E. O. Didorenka. 249–256 (in Ukrainian).
3. Kaliuzhna L Ye, ’Shchodo mozhlyvosti provedennia perevirky pokazan na mistsi za novym KPK Ukrainy’ [About ability to conducting of verification of testimonies on a place for new Criminal Procedural code of Ukraine] (2012) 16 (3) Chasopys Akademii advokatury Ukrainy 1–4 (in Ukrainian).
4. Nehrebetskyi V V, ’Perevirka pokazan na mistsi yak protses piznannia’ [Verification of testimonies on a place as cognitive process] (2016) 6 Pidpryiemnytstvo, hospodarstvo I pravo 177–181 (in Ukrainian).
5. Rohatynska N Z, ’Deiaki osoblyvosti provedennia slidchoho eksperymentu u kryminalnomu provadzhenni’ [Some features to conducting of investigators experiment in criminal procedure] (2016) 2 Aktualni problem pravoznavstva 149–153 (in Ukrainian).
6. Valchyshyn H I, ’Suchasne rozuminnia slidchoho eksperymentu: vitchyznianyi ta zarubizhni pohliady’ [Modern sense of the investigative experiment] (2018) 2 (2) Naukovyi visnyk Khersonskoho derzhavnoho universytetu 10 (in Ukrainian).
7. Belkin R S, Teoryia y praktyka sledstvennoho eksperymenta [Theory and practice of investigator experiment] Moskva (Vysshaia shkola MVD SSSR1959) 169 (in Russian).
8. Varfolomeieva T V ta in, Kryminalistyka. Akademichnyi kurs [Forensic science. Academy cource] (Kyiv, Yurinkom Inter 2011) 496 (in Ukrainian).
9. Dunaevska L G, Serhieieva D B, Organizatcia i taktyka slidchogo eksperymentu [Organization and tactic of investigative experiment] (Alerta 2017) 244 (in Ukrainian).
10. Dunaevska L G, Serhieieva D B, Kryminalistychna taktyka: Navchalnyi posibnyk [Forensic science tactic] Kyiv (Pravova yednist 2017) 146–164 (in Ukrainian).
11. Hukovskaia N I, Sledstvennyi eksperyment (posobye dlia sledovatelei) [Investigator experiment. Teachers manual] (Moskva, Yurydycheskaia lyteratura 1958) 96 (in Russian).
12. Kivalov S V, Mishchenko S M, Zakharchenko V Yu, Naukovo-praktychnyi komentar Kryminalnoho protsesualnoho Kodeksu Ukrainy [Scientific and Practical commentary of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine] (Kharkiv, Odisei 2013) 1183 (in Ukrainian).
13. Maliarenko V T, Honcharenko V G, Kryminalno-protsesualnyi Kodeks Ukraine: naukovo-praktychnyi komentar [Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine: scientific and Practical commentary] (Kyiv, Forum 2003) 938 (in Ukrainian).
14. Naukovo-praktychnyi komentar Kryminalnoho protsesualnoho kodeksu Ukrainy [Scientific and Practical commentary of the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine] 535. < http://mego.info> data zvernennia 21.12.2018 (in Ukranian).
15. Slovnyk ukrainskoi movy: v 11 tomakh [Modern Ukrainian language vocabulary: in 11 part] 2 (Kyiv 1971) data zvernennia 21.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
16. Kyslyi V M, Metodolohiia ta orhanizatsiia naukovykh doslidzhen [Methodology and organization of scientific research] Konspekt lektsii. data zvernennia 21.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
17. Shepitko V Yu, Kryminalistyka: pidruchnyk [Forensic science: manual] (Kharkiv, Pravo 2008) 464 (in Ukrainian).
18. Danich Ye O, ’Vykorystannia spetsialnykh znan pid chas provedennia slidchoho eksperymentu’ [Use of special knowledge in conduction investigative experiment] (avtoref dys kand yuryd nauk, Kyiv 2018) 18 (in Ukrainian).
19. ’Empirychni metody naukovoho doslidzhennia’ [Empirical methods of scientific research] / portal Mariupolskoho derzhavnoho universytetu data zvernennia 21.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).
20. Korotkyi kurs lektsii z dystsypliny «Istoriia i filosofiia nauky» [History and philosophy of law]
21. data zvernennia 21.12.2018 (in Ukrainian).