Independent experts - help or harm

[Anonymous]

Today, expert activity is in the same state as the country, in a state of free flight. The issue of the status of an expert has not been legally regulated; the issue of the use of appropriate expert methods in expert activity has not been legislatively regulated. This also applies to state judicial expert activity. In this regard, an ugly set of "experts" appears in the courts and, accordingly, an ugly set of "objective" decisions based on ugly "expert conclusions."
Currently, the methods of expert institutions of various ministries and departments of the Russian Federation do not differ or should not differ from each other. Such a situation, when each department acted according to its own expert methods, existed before the adoption of Federal Law 73-FZ of May 31, 2001. About the state forensic science activity in the Russian Federation, when the expert practice of different systems did not differ in uniformity in the approach to solving some common expert tasks, and the methods of expert research of the same objects significantly differed in depth and comprehensiveness of scientific development. After putting into operation in 2001 of the above Law, all forensic institutions of the same profile are obliged to carry out activities for the organization and production of forensic examination on the basis of a single scientific and methodological approach to expert practice, professional training and specialization of experts (Article 11 of the Federal Law on State Forensic Expertise in RF73-FZ). Thus, in accordance with the rule of law among state expert institutions, the methodology of forensic examination of the relevant profiles has been unified, that is, uniform scientific criteria and uniform scientifically tested methods are used (to avoid unjustified difficulties in the assessment of expert opinions by courts, as well as additional temporary and financial costs of repeated examinations). In order to achieve a unified scientific and methodological approach to expert practice, back in 1996, the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation and the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation, in agreement with the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation and the General Prosecutor's Office of the Russian Federation, approved an interdepartmental normative legal act Regulation on the Federal Coordination and Methodological Council on the problems of expert research. This Council includes the heads of state forensic institutions: the Ministry of Internal Affairs, the Ministry of Justice, the FSB and the State Customs Committee of Russia. In order for the practice of producing the same types of forensic examinations to be based on uniform scientific and methodological approaches, the RFSCE of the Ministry of Justice of Russia, together with the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia and with the participation of a number of other expert institutions and units, is currently conducting an inventory and certification of methods.
However, the FMSC, a body that was not endowed by the legislator with any powers, including the right to normatively establish the procedure for conducting expert studies, including in the framework of any legal proceedings, is only an advisory body. His acts are not binding and are only advisory in nature.
Accordingly, experts who call themselves independent (just wondering from whom?) Also began to unite in communities, and the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation even helped them in this by creating a system of voluntary certification of forensic experts on the basis of the RFCE (Russian Federal Center for Forensic Expertise), which in turn, it directly contradicts the norms of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the Law of the Russian Federation "On state judicial expert activity in the Russian Federation". And streams of expert scammers flowed to fool our common people.
And now just calculate how much income from this kind of "expertise" is losing our budget, what problems these "experts" create for law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.
Therefore, the question of issuing an expert opinion is quite simple - deposit money to the cashier and the expert will write everything you need.
My last case showed that now some government departments are doing this.
Having looked at the conditions under which the experts of the Russian Federal Center for Forensic Expertise work (the condition of the premises, special machinery and equipment, wages), I realized that under such conditions a state expert can take the path of falsifying research and giving a false opinion. What happened in the situation that I am currently working on. Such a conclusion was the reason for conducting an audit in the manner established by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation on the fact of the submission of falsified documents to the court, although in fact the documents are genuine and not falsified. But there is an "expert opinion" of the state institution, the court has no reason to doubt it.

 

[Детективное агентство Москва.]

Andrei, it seems to me that in this matter - as in any other business, if an expert is professional and values his reputation, then the conclusions will be at a high level - you can’t argue. As an example, I’m the head of the fire and technical laboratory of the Ministry of Emergencies in Moscow (by the way, I don’t know how it is now properly called). He is my schoolmate. So he, in any case, gives in conclusion what is actually. Otherwise, he, as a specialist and a professional, will lose his face.

 

[Anonymous]

I agree, unless of course the expert values his work and the majority in government agencies, and the one that does not value, whose reputation issue is below the issue of personal financial interest? This is for the poor government agencies. And when the expert activity is not state but commercialized, and special studies are put on the mass-market stream, for example, as automotive technical expertise in compulsory motor third-party liability insurance?

 

[Элен]

Today, expert activity is in the same state as the country, in a state of free flight ...
... an ugly set of "experts" and accordingly an ugly set of "objective" decisions based on ugly "expert conclusions" ...
... all forensic institutions of the same profile are required to carry out activities for the organization and production of forensic examination on the basis of a single scientific and methodological approach to expert practice, professional training and specialization of experts (Article 11 of the Federal Law on State Forensic Expertise in the Russian Federation73 -FZ).
In order for the practice of producing the same types of forensic examinations to be based on uniform scientific and methodological approaches, the RFSCE of the Ministry of Justice of Russia, together with the ECC of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Russia and with the participation of a number of other expert institutions and units, is currently conducting an inventory and certification of methods.
Accordingly, experts who call themselves independent (just wondering from whom?) Also began to unite in communities, and the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation even helped them in this by creating a system of voluntary certification of forensic experts on the basis of the RFCE (Russian Federal Center for Forensic Expertise), which in turn, it directly contradicts the norms of the Code of Civil Procedure and the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation, the Law of the Russian Federation "On state judicial expert activity in the Russian Federation". And streams of expert scammers flowed to fool our common people.
And now just calculate how much income from this kind of "expertise" is losing our budget, what problems these "experts" create for law enforcement agencies and the judiciary.
Therefore, the question of issuing an expert opinion is quite simple - deposit money to the cashier and the expert will write everything you need.

Andrew! Partially share the cry of your soul! I listen and want to join - to shout together with you, but I consider it necessary to challenge some theses. Therefore, harmonious choral singing, we, unfortunately, will not work)
1. I completely agree that the position of the expert is very uncertain today. Who is he? What do they want from him ?? And what should he do ??? The court makes a determination, and, as a rule, everything - both the judge and the parties look at the expert as the embodiment of truth in the last resort (after preparing the expert opinion, respectively, for one of the parties the expert becomes the embodiment of lies and greed). And all because no one - neither the judge, nor the lawyers want to think, very often they simply shift the responsibility to the expert. Many times I came across the fact that questions to the expert are posed by reformulating the article of the law, what to do CATEGORALLY NOT. An expert is an outside observer who can EXPLAIN the situation as a specialist. But he cannot and MUST NOT resolve legal issues and relate to the question (roughly speaking) of the guilt / innocence of the defendant.
2. The fragility of the current position of the expert is aggravated by the imperfection of the system - as you rightly pointed out - the lack of uniform, approved methods for conducting examinations. The knife is in my expert heart !!!
But it’s not at all expert practitioners (who, by the way, are very interested in working according to uniform approved methods!) Are to blame for this. My personal impressions: even ready-made (or almost ready-made methods) are not published or are published with such a strain that it is easier to develop your own, based on practical experience, than to wait for officially approved. It should not be, but it is. ALAS!
3. Andrey, independent experts are not so bad, believe me! Two, three, five "sold" expert opinions - and the fame of the expert will spread so far that no judge or lawyer will want to contact him. And with that expert institution in which he works. If a state expert is a married lady, then a non-state expert is a young maid. And the latter is seriously worried about his honor and reputation!
4. And, finally, about the money that our budget is losing) A simple example: I call the government agency, ask: can I do a phonoscopy? how much is? Answer: you can do it, sign up for SEPTEMBER (not a typo! I’ll call in January !!!). Do not cope - time! NIP rolls over - two! Do you propose saving the budget? Excuse me, but it’s hard to do without irony!
Yours faithfully
Helen.

 

[InfoPoisk]

Yeah, here's a lady riding our lad. : lol:: lol:: lol:
I wonder if there will be a duel or not?
Who is he a gentleman or a herald?
Well Dryune to the battle .....: P: P

 

[Детективное агентство ИКС-Инфо.]

Well Dryune to the battle .....: P: P

Nope!
Do not rush: P: P.

 

[Anonymous]

Andrew! Partially share the cry of your soul! I listen and want to join - to shout together with you, but I consider it necessary to challenge some theses. Therefore, harmonious choral singing, we, unfortunately, will not work)
1. I completely agree that the position of the expert is very uncertain today. Who is he? What do they want from him ?? And what should he do ??? The court makes a determination, and, as a rule, everything - both the judge and the parties look at the expert as the embodiment of truth in the last resort (after preparing the expert opinion, respectively, for one of the parties the expert becomes the embodiment of lies and greed). And all because no one - neither the judge, nor the lawyers want to think, very often they simply shift the responsibility to the expert. Many times I came across the fact that questions to the expert are posed by reformulating the article of the law, what to do CATEGORALLY NOT. An expert is an outside observer who can EXPLAIN the situation as a specialist. But he cannot and MUST NOT resolve legal issues and relate to the question (roughly speaking) of the guilt / innocence of the defendant.

Section 79. Appointment of Expertise
Examination may be entrusted forensic institution , a specific expert or several experts.

Not a private enterprise, but a forensic institution (legal form only for state institutions). How and on what basis does the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation carry out “voluntary” certification of private companies that call themselves expert, if the expert activity is initially, by force of law, implies a state legal form.
According to the concept of "concrete expert", this also applies to the concept of state, as it implies consideration of issues requiring special knowledge in various fields science, technology, arts, crafts , i.e. specialists engaged in constantly specific research, not included in the relevant list of types of examinations defined by order of the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation. And these specific studies should be carried out on a strictly scientific basis in accordance with the Law "On State Judicial Expert Activity in the Russian Federation." And the scientific basis for us is also provided only for state educational institutions.
Conclusion, the involvement of private practitioners in litigation is allowed only for specific exclusive crafts.
But often, forensic examinations are assigned precisely to commercial organizations that are already initially financially interested in making a profit, in contrast to government agencies that are supported by budget funds and operate at strict, non-contractual rates. No commercial organization can show its tariffs before the appointment of forensic examination. This should be alarming.

I draw an analogy with private detective work. Only a person with an appropriate procedural status has the right to conduct an investigation under the CPC. A private investigator - conducting an investigation in parallel with official rights and status, the person conducting the investigation is not endowed, therefore, the evidence that he received will only become evidence if the same investigator admits it, which is immediately opposed by the opposing defending party, and the court protects will support.

2. The fragility of the current position of the expert is aggravated by the imperfection of the system - as you rightly pointed out - the lack of uniform, approved methods for conducting examinations. The knife is in my expert heart !!! .

One hundred experts - one hundred opinions, there is a place to be in the absence of uniformity in the conduct of relevant examinations.
Why?
Because in accordance with Section 8 of the Law on State Judicial Expert Activity in the Russian Federation, an expert conducts research objectively, on a strictly scientific and practical basis , within the relevant specialty, comprehensively and in full. The expert opinion should be based on the provisions giving the opportunity to verify the validity and reliability of the conclusions based on generally accepted scientific and practical data .

And not on private ones, sometimes having relatively wide thresholds for the probability of identity. Those. in a comparative analysis of the object submitted for examination with the samples used in the framework of the methods, the results are averaged and indicated in the conclusion in a categorical form, since the conclusion cannot be a priori probable. Accordingly, from the breadth of the boundaries of the result, the expert can make (by “order”) a definitive conclusion by moving it from the average result or up or down.
The testing of such techniques is just carried out to determine the result of the study to the state of identity, so as not to give the expert the opportunity to manipulate the conclusion.
Only these methods are included in a single register of expert methods, after their approval by the interdepartmental body.

3. Andrey, independent experts are not so bad, believe me!

I believe, but money sometimes decides the outcome of a situation, the temptation is great, and sometimes not everyone succeeds in refraining from the “monkeys” of behavioral actions inherent in man. And for the current situation in Russia, even more so ...
And as the presiding judge of the highest instance once told me: What are you worried about, it’s not you who lost, but your client, but everything else LYRICS ...

 

[Anonymous]

Yeah, here's a lady riding our lad. : lol:: lol:: lol:
I wonder if there will be a duel or not?
Who is he a gentleman or a herald?
Well Dryune to the battle .....: P: P

Well Dryune to the battle .....: P: P

Nope!
Do not rush: P: P.

Already where you climb, there you get down.
Messrs. Detectives don’t do it beautifully, communicating with a lady like that, and with a very good specialist and responsible for their work.
And to know about how evidence is obtained, including by expert means, a self-respecting detective is simply obliged, well, and even more so, how can this evidence simply fall apart ...: lol :: lol :: lol:

 

[Детективное агентство ИКС-Инфо.]

I rushed !!!
And .... I did not lose.
Handsome !!! : D

Andrew!! Yours faithfully

 

[Anonymous]

I rushed !!!
And .... I did not lose.

And we have not finished yet, but just begun ...