ON THE ISSUE OF EVALUATING THE FORENSIC STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING RESULTS IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS

Problematic issues of forensic structural engineering as a source of evidence while criminal proceedings in the aspect of evaluating its results have been analyzed. Taking into account the relevance of this type of forensic examination both for the investigation of criminal proceedings and for other types of court proceedings, main provisions concerning evaluation of a forensic report in the field of forensic structural engineering are considered. Relevant norms of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine and of some foreign countries have been studied. It is concluded that, in fact, the approaches to the preparation of forensic report content are similar to the corresponding norms of the Ukrainian criminal procedure law. Certain discrepancies relate to the content of the report examination part – in some countries it does not contain a detailed description of the research course. In addition, according to Art. 242 of the Criminal Procedure Code of Ukraine, a defense can independently engage a forensic expert, therefore, Art. 102 needs improvement. And since the defense party is not endowed with the right to warn a forensic expert about responsibility for a knowingly false report and refusal without valid reasons to fulfill duties assigned to him, then the indicated norm must be supplemented for such cases – in the aspect of the forensic expert awareness on such responsibility. It is specified that the body (person) that appoints the forensic structural engineering  examination does not always ask a forensic expert questions within the framework of the subject of proof. Admissibility of evidence is primarily determined by its receipt based on compliance with law. The grounds are provided that may serve as a reason for accepting the forensic report as inadmissible evidence in the field of forensic structural engineering.