Procedure for evaluating an expert’s opinion in criminal proceedings

The problematic issues of the assessment of the expert’s conclusion by the subjects of criminal proceedings are investigated. The features of the expert’s conclusion as a source of evidence and the place of its assessment in the structure of evidence are noted. The purpose of the article is to determine the procedure and content of the assessment of the expert’s conclusion in criminal proceedings, taking into account that the initiator of the examination may be not only the prosecution. In this regard, attention is drawn to the prohibition of questioning an expert during the pre-trial investigation to clarify the conclusion provided by him. It is noted that during the pre-trial investigation, the process of forming evidence by the prosecution takes place by identifying, fixing, removing and studying traces of a criminal offense. An important role in this process is played by an examination, which can be initiated not only by the prosecution, but also by other participants in the criminal proceedings. An examination is an independent study by an authorized knowledgeable person of certain objects, phenomena and processes that may be related to a criminal offense. The assessment of the expert’s conclusion by the investigator or prosecutor is carried out by analyzing its content and checking it in order to obtain new factual data and compare them with each other. Such an assessment is carried out to obtain the basis for making certain procedural decisions, which are of an intermediate nature and may change. The prohibition on questioning an expert during the pre-trial investigation is considered as eliminating the possibility of pressure on the expert by the prosecution in order to obtain the desired result. Thus, the expert’s conclusion at the stage of the pre-trial investigation must be perceived by the prosecution «as is» without the possibility of obtaining its clarification or supplementation in a procedural manner. The final and complete assessment of the expert’s conclusion is carried out only during the trial, when there is a possibility of questioning the expert to clarify or supplement his conclusion, and the court appoints a repeated examination. During the court session, with the participation of the parties, the expert’s conclusion is assessed according to the criteria of its relevance, admissibility and reliability. Each party in the conditions of adversarial legal proceedings uses the specified criteria to defend its legal position.