Interrogation of a specialist in the investigation of offences committed with the use of information technologies: procedural and criminalistic aspects

Introduction. The emerging trend of increasing demand for the use of special knowledge in criminal proceedings is primarily associated with the negative process of transforming crime into the information sphere. The active development of information technologies and their great opportunities are an advantage in the choice of a criminal between the "traditional" way of committing a crime and the way using information technology as the main or auxiliary means. The obligatory participation of a specialist provided for by the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation during the seizure of electronic media is a certain guarantee of detection, preservation of forensically significant information on electronic media and obtaining evidence. In this regard, the status of a specialist as a carrier of special knowledge, his conclusion and testimony, which have always been inferior to the expert and the assessment of the evidentiary value of his conclusion and testimony, should receive a new argument for recognition. However, the lack of “popularity” among the investigator of using the testimony of a specialist as evidence in proving is possibly due to the lack of a procedural procedure for fixing his testimony as evidence, and the developed practice is on the wrong path of formation. The article summarizes the procedural problems of obtaining expert testimony and presents tactical recommendations aimed at improving the efficiency of the investigative action in question in the investigation of crimes committed with the use of information technology. Materials and Methods. The basis of the study is the Constitution of the Russian Federation, criminal procedure legislation, resolutions of the Plenum of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, departmental regulatory legal acts regulating the use of special knowledge in the investigation of crimes. The methodological basis of the study was the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, as well as cognitive methods of generalization, description, methods of observation, comparison and analysis. The Results of the Study. The problems of legal regulation of the testimony of a specialist as evidence are outlined and a set of circumstances is formed that determine the need for interrogation of a specialist in the investigation of crimes committed with the use of information technologies. Findings and Conclusions. The testimonies of a specialist obtained during the investigation of crimes committed with the use of information technologies are quite valuable evidence that allows the investigator to explain the circumstances relating, first of all, to the mechanism of the crime committed, which will make it possible to form real versions and develop an effective algorithm for their verification.