The difference in KR and detective work

[Бедеров Игорь Сергеевич]

I will quote Andrei Valerievich index.php? threads / 11065

Hi Igor))) Of course, the court will need a written report on the work, which can be (officially) only licensed by BH on the basis of a written agreement on the provision of services as part of the collection of information on a civil case .... In this case, when considering a civil cases in court, to determine the territorial jurisdiction, the question posed by Vasily is important ... Therefore, the documents should be drawn up precisely by the BH in accordance with the current norms of the Civil Code and the Federal Law on M&A ... There still clearly arises the question of "difficulties" in the conclusion of an agreement for the provision of such services (the customer and the contractor in different cities) .In this connection, it will be necessary to draw up an agreement using scanned copies and stipulate all this in the agreement (regarding their validity), the same applies to acceptance certificates. ..As a suggestion, if this is of course interesting, you can consider the topic of drafting cooperation agreements between specific BHs on the implementation of such an order s (naturally officially), so to speak, remotely ... Moreover, there is a practice of concluding such agreements (on cooperation), and some of them have already been concluded between the PM NP MOD ... Conclusion of such agreements will allow, formally, each of their participants, the Black Sea Rally, to speak directly as a customer or contractor. In this case, the task of execution is set in the form of a task plan, which is an annex to the main cooperation agreement ... Thank you for the link

Here is the real difference in the possibility of using the results of NPV in court.

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

Here, as it seems to me, the picture looms. There are some cases where the detective is really able to do what others either can not or can, but not qualified.
That is, apparently, there is a certain section of legal issues where both formalism, in which the detective is guided, and understanding of the meaning that the detective has, are needed.
True, I do not know what exactly it is about, but, apparently, it is possible to make a list of such issues or sections of the work.

At the same time, there is a huge layer of work that does not require these formalities, but, more importantly, requires knowledge in those industries in which the vast majority of detectives simply do not navigate. After all, it is not enough to have a formal right to collect information, one must also understand what exactly to collect. "Weak signals", which allow you to make decisions, can only be seen by those who are in the subject. Everyone sees them in his own subject, but no longer in someone else's.

By the way, this leads to another important conclusion in practice: there is no conflict of interest, because even if suddenly tomorrow, contrary to the law and common sense, only detectives are allowed to work with information, this does not mean that current detectives will get this work. This means that consultants wander off getting crusts. Because the current detectives will not do their work, just as they will not do the work of the current detectives.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Regarding the conflict of interests, I completely agree with Eugene ... They are not ... In connection with the fact that we (BH) and the Kyrgyz Republic have different goals (in the broad sense of this issue) ... However, regarding the implementation of precisely gathering information, in particular about the fact that BH (certainly it should be knowledgeable, being “in the subject,” as Eugene put it) will not be able to do what the KR can do, I don’t agree ... Everything is just the opposite, BH can do what it can (precisely when collecting information — excluding purely analytical work) the Kyrgyz Republic and, among other things, it can also legalize the results of its work (unlike the Kyrgyz Republic, in the implementation of which such legalization is sometimes (not always) impossible) . However, we will probably not argue ... This is a completely different topic and it seems that we basically have nothing to “share” ... We just need to learn from each other in order to carry out our work more efficiently and better ... How something like that ...

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

However, regarding the implementation of the collection of information, in particular regarding the fact that BH (certainly it should be knowledgeable, being “in the subject,” as Evgeni put it) will not be able to do what the KR can do. I don’t agree ... Here everything Quite the contrary, the Black Sea Region can do what it can (precisely when collecting information — excluding purely analytical work) from the Kyrgyz Republic, and, among other things, it can also legalize the results of its work (in contrast to the Kyrgyz Republic, in the implementation of which sometimes (not always) such legalization is not possible).

So this statement in itself already suggests that without being "in the subject", it is impossible to fully engage in it.
KR rarely has a problem of data legalization. But if it sometimes arises - for 19 years I don’t recall a single case, so that it would take her to solve the detective story. It lacks many other - less complex, and not requiring the involvement of other people - tools.

As for the question "detective can" - well, what can he analyze in the market for yogurt thickeners? And the one who works in this market can analyze and draw conclusions instantly. Therefore, more often they teach the market employees of yogurt thickeners the methods of collecting and processing information, and not the former security officials - the features of this market.

 

[Бедеров Игорь Сергеевич]

But if it sometimes arises - for 19 years I don’t recall a single case, so that it would take her to solve the detective story. It lacks many other - less complex, and not requiring the involvement of other people - tools.

What methods of legalizing evidence did you use? If it `s not a secret...

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

What methods of legalizing evidence did you use? If it `s not a secret...

So it depends on what needs to be legalized, and what is generally “legalized” in each specific case. We can talk about different things now. How do you abstract this?

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Probably misleading Eugene))) The question was considered (regarding BH) not about the analysis of the collected information (with regard to the same yoghurts), but about the collection of information ... And on the issue of legalizing the collected information, of course I would like to hear the answer .. . "Legalization" of information - giving the information (information) collected the status of evidence of a fact produced by the way established by the current norms of the Civil Law (we don’t mention other types of legislation — administrative, criminal). I think this wording of legalization is the broadest (in interpretation) will fit ...

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

Probably disingenuous Eugene)))

Absolutely not cunning. I just have the feeling that we are really talking about different things.

After all, the question was considered (regarding BH) not about the analysis of the collected information (with regards to the same yoghurts), but about the collection of information ...

And how can you collect something without doing analysis? Nobody will say to you: "Go there and take this." It is you who must understand where to go, and when you arrive there, you must understand that this is relevant, and this is not. Couriers are not interesting to anyone, everyone needs self-employed people.
The analysis begins at the moment when you decide: we take it, but we don’t take it. There is no collection in our work without analysis. If this, of course, is not "give-accept." As in yours, I don’t know.

And on the issue of legalization of the collected information, of course I would like to hear the answer ... "Legalization" of the information-giving the collected information the status of proof of a fact, produced by the way established by the current norms of the Civil Law (we do not mention other types of legislation-administrative, criminal) . I think this wording of legalization as the broadest (in its interpretation) is suitable ...

Can you give an example of a problem and a related problem? I really have not encountered such complexity in 19 years, so it’s hard for me to judge. Let's give an example from a business, which, in your opinion, is a black hole and only it can be solved in terms of this very legalization. And I will say what I think about this.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Well, about the fact that the work should be carried out “creatively” - I agree ... Only one thing but ... BH, and probably KR-works on order in which the customer sets clear tasks ... In my opinion, you can’t work and render any services on the principle of "go there, I don’t know where ... bring something, I don’t know what" ... When the task is set, the question of its solution is creative ... There is analysis and so on ... Something like that ... Relative a specific example is that you said that you found ways to legalize the information collected (less complex, not requiring the involvement of other people) ... Here you will give some specific example from your practice ... As part of a specific issue on legalization using civil law (for example) ... I personally don’t know how to “legalize” something by being a representative of the Kyrgyz Republic (whose status is not enshrined in any Law) ... Another question is if the name “Kyrgyz Republic” is simply a name. data collection activities are carried out by some organization having the status of legal person (or individual entrepreneur) and this type of activity (for the collection of information) is enshrined in the relevant regulatory acts as authorized ... Here "legalization" is quite possible ...

 

[Ющук Евгений Леонидович]

Well, about the fact that the work should be carried out “creatively” - I agree ... Only one thing but ... BH, and probably KR-works on order in which the customer sets clear tasks ... In my opinion, you can’t work and render any services on the principle of "go there, I don’t know where ... bring something, I don’t know what" ... When the task is set, the question of its solution is creative ... There is analysis and so on ... Something like this ...

Right. But the task of “Preventing the raider seizure of the plant”, “Tearing off the provocation”, “neutralizing the information attack”, “finding a connection between citizen A. and citizen B.”, “establishing the identity of the person hiding behind such and such nickname” - on the one hand, quite clear, but, on the other hand, they in no way represent "To appear at a point with the given coordinates, wait for a person in a gray cloak and accept from him the magazine" Spark "for 2010"

Regarding a specific example, you said that you found ways to legalize the collected information (less complicated, not requiring the involvement of other people) ... Here you will give some specific example from your practice ... As part of a specific issue on legalization using civil standards legislation (for example) ... I personally don’t know how to “legalize” something by being a representative of the Kyrgyz Republic (the status of which is not fixed by any Law) ... Another question is if the name “KR” is simply a name. And the activity of collecting information is carried out by some organization that has the status of a legal entity (or individual entrepreneur) and this type of activity (of collecting information) is enshrined in the relevant regulatory acts as authorized ... Here, "legalization" is quite possible ...

Well, apparently, you have to postpone it until the moment when someone gives an example. Because I just can’t imagine what you are talking about, what I have said is not associated with anything you say. But at the same time, I clearly see that you are sure of what has been said.