Theme for discussion ...

[Группа К]

Well, you can always lie. Nobody will check.

In my conclusions, I always proceed from the presumption of the integrity of my colleague. Unless otherwise proven ... and so on. This is the first. And secondly, a lie will be revealed for anyone. There are no fools among us.

 

[Группа К]

But I will draw a conclusion from this. Since there is nothing to brag about, then there is no work.

There is no boasting here. The detective does not want to talk about his work - let him be silent. But the attitude of colleagues in discussions will be like a theorist and not like a practitioner.
And it’s premature to draw conclusions, since we still didn’t see what we were discussing here: lol :: lol:

 

[Андрей Захаров]

Gentlemen, colleagues, what kind of "floodroom" do we get? Agree until the BH has rights, at least as a journalist, here you can conduct discussions until we say to each other "YOU WILL GO FAR").

Well, it's natural. I do not agree with Zakharov. If the detective is introduced into the process, it will be prescribed in the Code of Criminal Procedure and Code of Civil Procedure, but the design standards will have to comply with these laws. And just about the services. A detective, without concluding an agreement with a client participating in the process, will not have the right to provide evidence in court. This means that a corresponding contract must be submitted to a criminal case or court.

Robert and now the information provided by the BH is submitted to the court only if there is an act of acceptance of the work, in accordance with the civil law contract ... but otherwise otherwise it is not information from the black hole ... and in the process, Robert says, there is no need to “enter” the black hole ... this is evident from practice .... The practitioners who participated in the courts know this very well .... and the conversation in the subject is not about the standards of service delivery, and about the standards of rendering the services themselves ... that there are two big differences ... and I would recommend Robert to carefully read the procedural legislation .... regarding the "standards of evidence in the process" .... because before you say that then, this question must first be at least studied ... and not just reasoned without knowing the topic ....

 

[Группа К]

By the way, regarding the reporting form. It seems to me that it would be convenient to make an electronic form on the site. This will greatly simplify the process of filling it.

 

[Группа К]

.... and the conversation in the topic is not about the standards of service delivery, but about the standards of rendering the services themselves ... that are two big differences ....

Andrei Valerievich, one does not interfere with the other. Detectives need standards for both collecting and presenting information to the customer (in court).

 

[Роберт]

[quote = "Andrey Zakharov"
Robert and now the information provided by the BH is provided to the court only if there is an act of acceptance of the work, in accordance with the civil law contract ... but otherwise otherwise it information from the black hole ... and in the process, Robert says, there is no need to “enter” the black hole ... this is evident from practice .... The practitioners who participated in the courts know this very well .... and the conversation in the subject is not about the standards of service delivery, and about the standards of rendering the services themselves ... that there are two big differences ... and I would recommend Robert to carefully read the procedural legislation .... regarding the "standards of evidence in the process" .... because before you say that then, this question must first be at least studied ... and not just talk without knowing the topic .... [/ quote]
I do not care about the standards for the provision of services themselves. I do not write anything about them. I have a standard to do only what is written in the law on cdd. Well, another standard is to do it qualitatively. By the way, there are criminal courts, and there is also a code. It is necessary to introduce a detective into the process, as experts. Or will everyone agree that nothing in the laws needs to be changed and the status of the detective is quite acceptable for work? Then why don’t the clients go? There is no demand. Of course, attorneys are also not the biggest, but at least there is one. And I’ll definitely use the advice to read, I only read more useful books.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

What reports Alexander after all, no one even knows how many there are black holes in Russia that generally collect information on the same civil or criminal cases ... after all, none of the existing organizations, neither the MOD, nor the ARD, nor anyone else We didn’t carry out any research in this direction ... but, by the way, everyone who is not too lazy is trying to make some proposals for changing the Laws .... without even knowing if there are any real problems in the implementation of any BH rights in criminal or civil proceedings .... that’s probably what you should do .... if of course there is a desire and opportunity ..... to see if there are problems .... in my opinion, there are no problems ... and all the information, both in the criminal and in the civil process is accepted normally .... this is from practice ... and if so, then then fence the garden ...

 

[Роберт]

.... and the conversation in the topic is not about the standards of service delivery, but about the standards of rendering the services themselves ... that are two big differences ....

Andrei Valerievich, one does not interfere with the other. Detectives need standards for both collecting and presenting information to the customer (in court).

Personally, I need formalized samples, drafting documents, according to which the investigator and judge must accept them and draw them up with relevant decisions on the recognition of material evidence and accession to the criminal case. This is not there. Experts have a clear form of the document "expert opinion". That’s what detectives need. With a clear reference to a specific article of the Code of Criminal Procedure or Code of Civil Procedure. I understand that everything can be formalized with a simple interrogation protocol. But for us, status is fundamentally important.

 

[Роберт]

And status is the demand for detectives. This is fundamentally important. And the standards will immediately comply. Because getting a client and not doing his job will become more difficult.

 

[Андрей Захаров]

And status is the demand for detectives. This is fundamentally important. And the standards will immediately comply. Because getting a client and not doing his job will become more difficult.

Robert ... regarding the admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings in particular ... read the Code of Criminal Procedure ... everything is written there .... And regarding the demand for services .... there is a good driver’s saying ... "it wasn’t about the woman. ... " But there can be no" samples "of documents that you are talking about .... if you want, of course, I can provide reports on criminal and civil cases adopted by the courts and law enforcement authorities .... but these are not samples ... besides this, some of the documents have already been published on this forum .... for some reason this did not cause much interest .... but this is so ... by the way .. ...