Information Technologies in Fixing the Evidence in Court

  • Alexander TARASOV Department of Criminal Law and Procedure, Institute of Law, Bashkir State University, Russia
  • Lira YULBERDINA Department of Civil Law and Process, Sterlitamak branch of Bashkir State University, 453100, Sterlitamak, Lenin Ave. 47A, +7-3473-437419, Russia

Abstract

The paper aims to analyze modern combined methods of fixing evidence at the stage of the trial in the criminal process in Russia. For this, the following objectives were defined: to analyze foreign criminal practice, to indicate the shortcomings and prospects for digital technologies implementation in Russian court practice, to compare foreign and Russian legislation relative to the use of information technologies during investigation and proceedings stages, and to develop recommendations. Research methods combine theoretical (comparative and legal) analysis of Russian and foreign legislation were used together with empirical ones (data analysis of the judicial practice cases).Findings: generally accepted forms of conducting criminal proceedings are complicating (online court sessions broadcasting, electronic documents compilation and information storage, combining methods of fixing evidence at various stages of criminal justice). Preserving the written form of keeping the record of a court session, and providing that information and technological means of fixing (video recording and audio protocolling) are necessary. The use of ubiquitous audio or video recording of investigative actions on the one hand will help to avoid numerous procedural mistakes in pre-trial proceedings, providing certain guarantees for the rights of participants in criminal proceedings. The authors propose to supplement Russian criminal procedure legislation and other countries with a number of norms, according to which it is necessary to introduce information fixation means in courts – audio recording or video recording at the trial stage. These means should be used by the court at the request of a defendant and (or) one’s defense counsel.

References

[1] Bang, B.L., Stanton, D., and Hemmens, C. 2018. Police recording of custodial interrogations. International Journal of Police Science & Management, 20: 3-18. doi:10.1177/1461355717750172
[2] Daniel, L.E., and Daniel, L.E., eds. 2012. Discovery of video evidence. In Digital Forensics for Legal Professionals:129-133. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-1-59749-643-8.00018-3.
[3] Daniel, L.E., and Daniel, L.E. eds. 2012. Discovery of audio evidence. In Digital Forensics for Legal Professional: 135-138. Elsevier. doi:10.1016/B978-1-59749-643-8.00019-53.
[4] Davis, J.P., and Valentine, T. 2015. Human verification of identity from photographic images. In: Forensic Facial Identification: 209-238. Wiley.
[5] Feigenson, N., and Dunn, M.A. 2003. New visual technologies in court: Directions for research. Law and Human Behavior, 27(1): 109-126. doi:10.1023/A:1021683013042.
[6] Granot, Y., Balcetis, E., Feigenson, N., and Tyler, T. 2018. In the eyes of the law: Perception versus reality in appraisals of video evidence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 24(1): 93-104.
[7] Kirkpatrick, K. 2014. Technology Confounds the Courts. Communications of the ACM, 57(5): 27-29. doi:10.1145/2591231. []
[8] Leng, T.K. 2014. E-Discovery of electronically stored information in commercial litigation. Computer Law & Security Review, 30: 171-178. doi:10.1016/j.clsr.2014.01.003.
[9] Maras, M.H., and Alexandrou, A. 2019. Determining authenticity of video evidence in the age of artificial intelligence and in the wake of Deepfake videos. The International Journal of Evidence & Proof, 23(3): 255-262. doi:10.1177/1365712718807226.
[10] Miller, A.R. 2012. Electronic discovery and the adoption of information technology. The Journal of Law, Economics, & Organization, 30(2): 217-243. doi:10.1093/jleo/ews038.
[11] Nellis, M. 2017. Setting the parameters of ‘digital (criminal) justice’ in Scotland. Probation Journal, 64(3): 191-208, doi:10.1177/0264550517712625.
[12] O'Brien, E., Daeid, N.N., and Black, S. 2015. Science in the court: pitfalls, challenges and solutions. Articles from Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 370(1674): 20150062, doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0062.
[13] Popova, I.A., and Zinchenko, I.A. 2014. The criminal proceedings: problems of evidence of modern Russia. Moscow: Direct-Media.
[14] Riccio, V., Torres, A., and Guedes, C. 2019. Video evidence, legal culture and court decision. In: G. Tessuto, V.K. Bhatia, J. Engberg (Eds.), Frameworks for Discursive Actions and Practices of the Law (vol. 1: 333-347). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
[15] Rybkina, K.V. 2017. The protocol of the court session and the functions of the secretary of a court session. Priority Scientific Directions: From Theory to Practice, 37, 201-206, https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=30526607 (accessed April 21, 2018).
[16] Sirazetdinova, M.F., and Lukmanova, R.Kh. 2016. Specifics of consciousness manipulation in the legal sphere. Eurasian Law Journal, 5(96): 373-376, https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=26289563 (accessed July 3, 2018).
[17] The federal law dated 12.08.1995 No. 144-FZ (ed. 06.07.2016) ‘On the operational search activity’. In SobranieZakonodatelstva RF. Retrieved March 20, 2018, from http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_7519/ (accessed January 7, 2018).
[18] The federal law dated 29.07.2018 No. 228 ‘On Amending the CrPC of the Russian Federation’, http://www.consultant.ru/document/cons_doc_LAW_303432/ (accessed January 7, 2018).
[19] Turchaninova-Rodina, A.A. 2016. Protocol of the court session in accordance with Chapter 20 of the Code of Administrative Proceedings of RF: the features of compiling and advantages of using SRS FEMIDA when writing. GlagolPravosudiya, 1(11): 113-116, https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=26486299 (accessed Dec. 2, 2017).
[20] Uzun, E., and Sencar, H.T. 2014. A preliminary examination technique for audio evidence to distinguish speech from non-speech using objective speech quality measures. Speech Communication, 61-62: 1-16. doi:10.1016/j.specom.2014.03.003
[21] Wallace, A. 2013. Using video link to take forensic evidence - lessons from an Australian case study. International Journal of Evidence and Proof, 17(3): 221-249. doi:10.1350/ijep.2013.17.3.428
[22] Xu, A.L. 2017. Chinese judicial justice on the cloud: a future call or a Pandora’s box? An analysis of the ‘intelligent court system’ of China. Information & Communications Technology Law, 26(1): 59-71. doi:10.1080/13600834.2017.1269873
[23] Yakimovich, Yu.K., and Pan, T.D. 2004. Pre-trial proceedings on the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation: participants in pre-trial proceedings, evidence and proof, initiation of criminal proceedings, inquiry and preliminary investigation (Second Edition). Saint-Petersburg: ‘Press’ Legal Center.
Published
2019-11-22
How to Cite
TARASOV, Alexander; YULBERDINA, Lira. Information Technologies in Fixing the Evidence in Court. Journal of Advanced Research in Law and Economics, [S.l.], v. 9, n. 7, p. 2431-2436, nov. 2019. ISSN 2068-696X. Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/jarle/article/view/4078>. Date accessed: 25 feb. 2024. doi: https://doi.org/10.14505//jarle.v9.7(37).30.