ПРЯМЫЕ И КОСВЕННЫЕ ДОКАЗАТЕЛЬСТВА, ОПРАВДАНИЕ ИЛИ ПРИГОВОР
ЭЛЬМИРА БАГАНДОВА
DOI: https://doi.org/10.59630/25792644-2023.2.25-116
ABSTRACT
Direct and indirect evidence, being reliable, will allow us to come to the truth, and if properly applied, they can serve as a means to achieve justice. Let's pay attention directly to the indirect evidence. What are these, and what is their meaning? indirect evidence in judicial and investigative practice is the most important means of uncovering the most dangerous crimes – such as terrorism, premeditated murder, embezzlement or embezzlement, etc. Each intermediate fact is established by several proofs.
The structure of indirect evidence has figuratively two stages. The first stage is when intermediate facts become known. The second stage is when conclusions are drawn from the available facts about the presence or absence of events of a crime, its legal qualification, the guilt of the person who committed this crime, and all other circumstances of legal significance.
Underestimation of circumstantial evidence is often the cause of judicial errors. Grodzinsky M.M. in his work, analyzing the legislative definition of the concept of evidence, pointed out the distinction that the law draws between factual data (information about facts) and the means of establishing them, and noted that this distinction allows "the investigator and the court to take into account the peculiarities of both sides of the evidence process – collecting factual data and operating with them, while at the same time, their indissoluble connection."
Exculpatory circumstantial evidence establishes facts incompatible with the prosecution. These facts can be divided into seven groups. Let's pay attention to one of them, namely the sixth due to the circumstances in the criminal case related to perjury under Article 159 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, which were presented above. The sixth group combines facts that refute the accusatory evidence or call into question their reliability. Such facts are: the unreliability of the testimony of victims and witnesses incriminating the accused; the contradiction of the accusatory evidence to the actual circumstances of the case established by other evidence.