Forms of special knowledge used during the investigation of secret theft of someone else's property

Abstract

The concept of special knowledge forms used during pre-trial investigation is considered. The views of scientists regarding the classification of special knowledge forms used during the investigation of criminal proceedings are analyzed. The opinion of the majority of scientists regarding the division of forms of special knowledge into procedural and non-procedural ones is highlighted. In addition, besides procedural and non-procedural forms of special knowledge, the statement on the selection of such a form as mixed, which combines the features of the two forms indicated above, is considered. Another division of special knowledge by forms is also analyzed. Each form of special knowledge is explored in more detail. Statistical studies of scientists regarding the use of forms of special knowledge in practical activities are presented. Scientific views on conducting forensic examinations in criminal proceedings are analyzed. Peculiarities of appointment of examinations are considered. Aspects of the expediency of using advisory and reference information during the investigation of criminal offenses, in particular theft, are highlighted. The positive consequences of the involvement of specialists in conducting investigative (research) actions as a form of special knowledge are clarified. The main goals of special knowledge used during the investigation of secret theft of someone else's property are determined. Forms of special knowledge, which are used during the inspection of the scene at the beginning of the pre-trial investigation, are revealed. Judicial practice in criminal cases based on the fact of theft regarding the use of forms of special knowledge during pre-trial investigation is selectively considered. The forms of special knowledge used during the investigation of the secret theft of someone else’s property are analyzed. The need to involve specialists in inspecting the scene during the investigation of thefts is revealed. It is emphasized that it is mandatory to appoint a commodity expert when investigating the secret theft of someone else’s property. The expediency of involving experts and specialists in the investigative (search) actions carried out during the investigation of the above offenses is analyzed. Attention is paid to consultations and references that can carry important information and influence the receipt of substantive evidence.