法庭记录录音的程序意义

D. V. Tatyanin
{"title":"法庭记录录音的程序意义","authors":"D. V. Tatyanin","doi":"10.17803/2311-5998.2024.113.1.172-178","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes the problem of the possibility of using audio recordings of the minutes of the court session in the process of proving criminal cases. The author tries to define the definitions of the minutes of the court session in criminal proceedings. Based on the conducted research, the author concludes that in relation to criminal proceedings, the minutes of the court session drawn up at all judicial stages and in all proceedings cannot have different meanings and should definitely be considered as evidence. The use of the audio recording of the court session is aimed at ensuring a valid reflection of what is taking place in the court session, which should be reflected accordingly in its protocol. However, as practice shows, the minutes of the court session do not always reflect the content of the audio recording, which initially calls into question the correctness and quality of the minutes of the court session, reflecting the course of the trial in it. The legislator does not require full reflection of the audio recording in the minutes of the court session, which allows the court, when challenging the inconsistency of the minutes of the court session with its audio recording and the need to make changes and additions to it in this regard, to refuse to satisfy the petition in this regard. that the full compliance of the minutes of the court session with its audio recording is not required. The opinion is substantiated on the need for the content of the minutes of the court session to correspond to its audio recording as the basis for its recognition as admissible evidence.","PeriodicalId":508920,"journal":{"name":"Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL))","volume":"30 22","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Procedural Significance of the Audio Recording of the Court Record\",\"authors\":\"D. V. Tatyanin\",\"doi\":\"10.17803/2311-5998.2024.113.1.172-178\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The article analyzes the problem of the possibility of using audio recordings of the minutes of the court session in the process of proving criminal cases. The author tries to define the definitions of the minutes of the court session in criminal proceedings. Based on the conducted research, the author concludes that in relation to criminal proceedings, the minutes of the court session drawn up at all judicial stages and in all proceedings cannot have different meanings and should definitely be considered as evidence. The use of the audio recording of the court session is aimed at ensuring a valid reflection of what is taking place in the court session, which should be reflected accordingly in its protocol. However, as practice shows, the minutes of the court session do not always reflect the content of the audio recording, which initially calls into question the correctness and quality of the minutes of the court session, reflecting the course of the trial in it. The legislator does not require full reflection of the audio recording in the minutes of the court session, which allows the court, when challenging the inconsistency of the minutes of the court session with its audio recording and the need to make changes and additions to it in this regard, to refuse to satisfy the petition in this regard. that the full compliance of the minutes of the court session with its audio recording is not required. The opinion is substantiated on the need for the content of the minutes of the court session to correspond to its audio recording as the basis for its recognition as admissible evidence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508920,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL))\",\"volume\":\"30 22\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL))\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2024.113.1.172-178\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Courier of Kutafin Moscow State Law University (MSAL))","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17803/2311-5998.2024.113.1.172-178","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

文章分析了在证明刑事案件的过程中使用开庭记录录音的可能性问题。作者试图界定刑事诉讼中开庭记录的定义。根据所进行的研究,作者得出结论,就刑事诉讼而言,在所有司法阶段和所有诉讼程序中起草的开庭记录不可能有不同的含义,肯定应被视为证据。使用开庭录音的目的是确保有效反映开庭时的情况,这一点应在庭审记录中得到相应反映。然而,实践证明,开庭记录并不总是反映录音内容,这就使反映审判过程的开庭记录的正确性和质量受到质疑。立法者并不要求在开庭记录中完全反映录音内容,这使得法院在质疑开庭记录与录音内容不一致以及需要就此进行修改和补充时,可以拒绝满足这方面的请求。该意见的依据是开庭记录的内容必须与录音相符,这是承认其为可接受证据的基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Procedural Significance of the Audio Recording of the Court Record
The article analyzes the problem of the possibility of using audio recordings of the minutes of the court session in the process of proving criminal cases. The author tries to define the definitions of the minutes of the court session in criminal proceedings. Based on the conducted research, the author concludes that in relation to criminal proceedings, the minutes of the court session drawn up at all judicial stages and in all proceedings cannot have different meanings and should definitely be considered as evidence. The use of the audio recording of the court session is aimed at ensuring a valid reflection of what is taking place in the court session, which should be reflected accordingly in its protocol. However, as practice shows, the minutes of the court session do not always reflect the content of the audio recording, which initially calls into question the correctness and quality of the minutes of the court session, reflecting the course of the trial in it. The legislator does not require full reflection of the audio recording in the minutes of the court session, which allows the court, when challenging the inconsistency of the minutes of the court session with its audio recording and the need to make changes and additions to it in this regard, to refuse to satisfy the petition in this regard. that the full compliance of the minutes of the court session with its audio recording is not required. The opinion is substantiated on the need for the content of the minutes of the court session to correspond to its audio recording as the basis for its recognition as admissible evidence.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信