Internal Conviction and Forms of Expert Conclusions

Abstract

The Article Purpose is to determine grounds, essence, conditions and reflection of the forensic expert’s internal conviction in conclusions of performed research, the concept and significance of possible conclusions for criminal proceedings. Fulfilling the set goal was made possible due to the use of: the system-structural method (to determine peculiarities of formation and external manifestation of the forensic expert’s internal conviction); the comparative-legal analysis (to compare approaches of researchers with probative value of probable conclusions); the formal-legal (to reveal procedural independence of the forensic expert and formulate the concept of “probable expert conclusion”). Objective basis of the forensic expert’s internal conviction is objects of forensic examination, expert methods, scientific positions of forensic examination, research results; subjective: the forensic expert’s specific expertise and personal experience. The essence of internal conviction is psychological state of a forensic expert, his/her confidence in obtained findings and readiness to word conclusions. The procedural condition of objectivity, impartiality of internal conviction are guaranteed by the forensic expert’s independence. External manifestation of the forensic expert’s inner conviction is answers to addressed questions (in the form of categorical judgments). The lack of internal conviction may be embodied by the forensic expert while formulating a conclusion as to possibility of existence (availability) of circumstances and facts. A possible conclusion should be distinguished from a probable one. A possible conclusion is a form of the forensic expert’s version, which probability or credibility is determined stemming from results of evaluation of all pieces of evidence as a whole.