Противодействие предварительному расследованию: в продолжение научной дискуссии

Introduction: In the article, the author addresses the problem of the formation of a private forensic doctrine on counteracting preliminary investigation. Despite the wide scientific and practical interest in this particular forensic doctrine, it continues to remain controversial in a number of positions. Respecting and recognizing the points of view of various researchers, the author reasonably expressed his own vision of the essence and correlation of some forensic scientific categories related to the named teaching: counteraction to preliminary investigation, concealment of crimes, counteraction to criminal prosecution. Materials and Methods: the normative basis of the research is formed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, criminal and remedial legislation. The methodological basis of the study is the general dialectical method of scientific knowledge, which is universal in nature, as well as the methods of logical deduction, induction, cognitive methods and techniques of observation, comparison, analysis, generalization and description. Results of the Study: the problem of counteraction to preliminary investigation is one of the most relevant for forensic science, which is both theoretical, methodological and applied in nature. As part of the study of the problems of counteracting the investigation, it is advisable to distinguish between actions on the implementation by the accused and / or his defender of the constitutional right to protection from criminal prosecution and actions of the same persons, as well as other persons in their interests, aimed at deliberately distorting (discrediting) evidence and other results on criminal case. In addition, in order to optimize the work of the investigator, it is important to study the typical actions of the participants on the part of the defense, which is necessary both from the point of exposing and recognizing as untenable the arguments of the representatives on the part of the defense, and from the use of the evidentiary information presented by them to establish circumstances that, to one degree or another, in favor of the accused. Findings and Conclusions: Forensic science, developing recommendations for improving the performance of the investigator (interrogator), including in the context of countering the investigation, should rely on the existing requirements of the criminal procedure legislation, which is one of the sources of forensic recommendations.