Start. How it was
Not long ago, a young man approached me - a fourth-year student, a future economist.
The essence of the appeal is as follows. A criminal case was opened against him for illegal acquisition and possession of drugs under Part 2 of Art. 228 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, because the size of the narcotic drug turned out to be especially large. This young man assured me that in this story he is a completely random person. Although, to be honest, I don’t give a damn. So, this guy, named Nikolai, told me his story about how he spent his day off. On Sunday, after calling ahead, he met with his friend Anatoly to go shopping. Walking from one store to another, through the central city park, Nikolai notices a brand new matchbox under his feet. Quickly bending down, Nikolai picked up a box of matches he had discovered from the park path. Having opened the box, he saw that instead of matches it contained an object in a factory-made foil package, well, very much, in his words, reminiscent of a condom. Without having time to evaluate the find, Nikolai noticed three young men rushing towards him. Postponing the study of the find until better times, Nikolai quickly put the box in his pocket, since he clearly had no time for it right now. Unfamiliar guys immediately laid our heroes, as they say, face down on the asphalt.
Soon Nikolai and Anatoly learned that the strangers who attacked them were operational employees of the internal affairs bodies. Next, our heroes were placed at a distance of half a meter from each other, facing the portal wall of the southern gate of the park.
Then one of the employees, in the presence of two retired witnesses walking in the park, asked my future client a question whether he had prohibited items, weapons, drugs, and the like on him. Nikolai replied that he had nothing prohibited on him. Having subjected Nikolai to a personal search, the operatives found in the side pocket of his jacket the very same matchbox stuffed with some kind of shiny bag, well, very reminiscent of a condom.
Further everything follows the proven scheme. Protocol of personal search, signed by the person being searched and attesting witnesses. Delivery to the police department. And a six-hour conversation between six operatives and my future ward.
During emotional communication with a detachment of operatives, Nikolai suddenly realized the gravity of what he had done. And, as a result, a wave of repentance for committing a criminal offense washed over him.
After which the investigator of the department for combating drug trafficking, a young, pretty lady, interrogated the repentant Nikolai, recording his confession in the protocol of interrogation of the suspect. And to give the appearance of comprehensiveness of the preliminary investigation, the investigator convinced Nikolai to conduct a search in his apartment without going to the apartment, that is, to draw up a report without leaving his office. In all likelihood, the investigator was taught this way by her senior comrades.
Nikolai clearly liked this idea. He willingly cooperated with the investigation. Still, no one will wander around the apartment and attract the watchful attention of neighbors.
Taking into account the awareness of his own guilt and other concessions to the investigation, Nikolai earned leniency from the investigator in the form of a written undertaking not to leave the place. In connection with this, in the morning he was released home in peace. So, Nikolai and I entered into an agreement to provide him with legal assistance. Now he was no longer just Nikolai, he became my client. Accordingly, I became his defender. Having listened to my client’s version, I only had to familiarize myself with the protocol of his interrogation, the protocol of his personal search and the protocol of the search in his home. Which is what was done when we first met the charming tracker. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that my client Nikolai’s friend, Anatoly, was not subjected to a personal search during their capture, was not taken to the police department, and did not figure in the case at all. Anatoly was not subjected to a personal search in a procedural sense; in fact, the playful hands of the detectives walked over the young man’s body, but for some reason they did not draw up a protocol about this for history. Apparently because nothing was found on him. So they decided that Anatoly did not exist in nature at all. Perhaps there were some other motives for Anatoly to remain without due attention from fighters against drug trafficking.
From the protocol of interrogation of the suspect, I learned that Nikolai, having called his friend mentioned above, went for a shopping trip. We decided to do some Sunday shopping, so to speak. And so that the trip would not seem boring, Nikolai decided to cheer up with spice.
For this purpose, he called from his mobile phone to a number that once and somewhere, on the wall of some house, was written in large letters: “Spice! Phone 555-77-99.” In one of the supermarkets, Nikolay deposited 500 rubles into this phone number through the Svyaznoy terminal and, calling it again to confirm the payment, received the following instructions.
A voice from the other end of the “wire” informed Nikolai that the goods would be in a matchbox on the pedestrian path of the central city park near the southern gate of the park, so many meters from such and such a lamppost. Nikolay was also informed of the time the box appeared on the path and the time it (the box) was waiting, that is, 15 minutes from the moment it was placed.
After which everything happened as described above, except that Nikolai knew about his acquisition of the drug. In addition, during his personal search, Nikolai, when asked by the officer whether he had any prohibited items on him, answered: “Yes, in the right pocket of my jacket I have a matchbox with a narcotic drug, Spice, inside.”
The pensioner witnesses in their interrogations probably gave similar testimony, I thought. But, unfortunately, the secrecy of the investigation, which is always shrouded in darkness, does not allow one to get acquainted with the protocols of interrogation of witnesses. The following was seen from the personal search protocol. Some detective there and there carried out a personal search of citizen Nikolai, who was asked to voluntarily hand over items prohibited in civilian circulation - weapons, drugs. After which, citizen Nikolai stated that he had the Spice smoking mixture for personal use. And then everything is as required by the form of this protocol. What was seized, how was it packaged. Signatures and addresses of witnesses.
It would seem like something even more. The guy is surrounded by the “I don’t want to” thing. But there is one point that was impossible not to notice. The entry in the protocol: “After which, citizen Nikolai stated that he has the Spice smoking mixture for personal use” was made in completely different color ink. No, of course, not red or green. The ink was also blue, but it was noticeably different from the color of the rest of the protocol text.
This circumstance gave me confidence. I kindly asked the investigator to make me a photocopy of this protocol. In response to my request, the investigator also kindly photocopied this protocol to me. “Now they won’t replace it,” I thought.
Next, I asked to see the protocol of the search of the home for my review. I was very interested in its contents, the names of the participants in the search, as well as the witnesses in front of whose eyes the astral search was carried out :-). Once again, the charming investigator and I exchanged mutual pleasantries. I asked her, she gave me a copy of the protocol. And what is very important, also a copy of the order to conduct a search in the suspect’s home. The protocol was drawn up in accordance with all the rules provided for by law. Not a single signature of its participant was missed. And the participants in this search were a fairly large company. These are two detectives, a forensic expert, two witnesses, who for some reason lived on the other side of our city, while the search was carried out at 21.30. Well, and, of course, this entire honest company was led by an investigator already known to us for her charm.
In the line “during the search it was discovered and seized” it is written: “no items prohibited in circulation were found.” Still would! There was no search in nature. But on paper it was.
Interrogation participants
Participants in the interrogation include:
- mandatory participants - investigator, interrogator, person being interrogated, teaching staff (if a witness or victim under 14 years of age is being interrogated); persons interrogated may include the witness, victim, suspect and accused;
- optional participants - a specialist who ensures the use of technical means, an expert, an official who carries out operational investigative activities, a lawyer for a witness, a representative of a participant in criminal proceedings, a defense lawyer, a translator, a psychologist or a teacher present during the interrogation of a person aged 14 to 18 years.
The summoning of the witness and the victim for questioning is carried out by a summons, which indicates the address, time and date of appearance for questioning, and the consequences of failure to appear without good reason. The summons is served against a signature or transmitted through various means of communication.
Finished works on a similar topic
Coursework Interrogation: concept, grounds, procedure 420 ₽ Abstract Interrogation: concept, bases, procedure 230 ₽ Test work Interrogation: concept, grounds, procedure 220 ₽
Receive completed work or specialist advice on your educational project Find out the cost
If a person who is summoned for interrogation is temporarily absent, the subpoena must be served on a member of his family (an adult) or transferred to the administration at the place of his study, work on behalf of the inquirer, the investigator is transferred to other persons and organizations obligated to hand over the subpoena to the person summoned for interrogation.
A person summoned for interrogation is obliged to appear at the appointed place at the appointed time or to notify in advance the necessary persons (investigator, interrogating officer) about the reasons for their failure to appear at the time suggested to him. If a person fails to appear for questioning without providing valid reasons, this may lead to the application of procedural coercion measures against him or her (Article 111 of the Code of Criminal Procedure).
Features of calling certain categories of citizens for questioning:
- if a person is under 16 years of age, he is called through his legal representatives, through the administration at the place of his study or work;
- military personnel are called through the command of the unit in which he serves (Article 188);
- persons in custody, accused, suspects are summoned through the administration of the pre-trial detention center.
So what do we have?
1. Opera protocol of personal search, in which Nikolai agrees that he has a matchbox with a narcotic drug in his pocket - spice.
2. Protocol of interrogation as a suspect, where Nikolai admits to purchasing and storing a narcotic drug for personal use. 3. Protocol of the search of the home, from which it follows that nothing prohibited was found in Nikolai’s apartment. If we add here all sorts of surveillance certificates, protocols of interrogations of witnesses from among detectives and witnesses, then, it would seem, the matter is done and must be sent to court. Now let's go through it in order.
The personal search protocol is clearly flawed, that is, if it is studied more thoroughly by ICR investigators, signs of falsification will emerge anyway. Which I clearly hinted at during a short personal conversation with the head of the investigative department for the fight against non-citizens. And for some reason he immediately began to turn the tables on the operators. I agreed with him: “Not opera! Some kind of hooligans!”
Below is the interrogation report as a suspect. In Russia, this is quite enough to get a certain term if the protocol is grateful. Because the investigator, and then the court, will supplement the accompanying body of evidence with all sorts of tinsel in the form of certificates, reports and witness statements of employees with witnesses.
What also brought joy to my heart was the search report, which could have been destroyed in court by interrogating the search participants, who, as we know, had never been to Nikolai’s apartment.
Thus, it was necessary to concentrate all his attention on the protocol of Nikolai’s interrogation, during which a wave of repentance washed over him.
From my conversation with Nikolai, I learned that after he was taken to the police department, which is not territorial in relation to the place of the so-called crime, for 5-6 hours the operatives, as part of a group of 6 people, convinced him to admit guilt, forcing plot (story) of the crime event.
Without delving into the methods of persuasion, which are quite well known, from Nikolai’s story I understood that throughout his entire stay in the department, he did not see one of the most important procedural participants in a criminal case for him - his lawyer.
“There were a lot of police officers in civilian clothes in the office, who kept coming in and out,” Nikolai told me.
“Six hours later, the investigator arrived and began the interrogation. Several people in civilian clothes were present during the interrogation. At the end of the interrogation, I signed a protocol and some other papers, like a written undertaking not to leave the place. It’s hard to say whether there was a lawyer among these people in civilian clothes, because none of them advised me in private; on the contrary, they convinced me to confess,” Nikolai continued his story.
“After which, the investigator told me that she had instructions to conduct a search in my apartment. But, since I know that you have nothing in your apartment, and it’s already late, we won’t go for a search. We’ll just draw up a protocol in the cockpit as if we had carried it out. I agreed to sign the search report, but allegedly nothing was found there,” Nikolai said.
“And the search itself was nothing more than “allegedly,” I thought.
After analyzing all the information on Nikolai’s case, I submitted a petition to the investigator to re-interrogate Nikolai as a suspect. Please note: repeated, and not additional interrogation of the suspect. It is important.
The investigator, considering the words “repeated” and “additional” synonyms, thinking that we wanted to supplement our testimony with new circumstances, granted my request with great pleasure.
What you need to know about interrogation... (Part one)
lawyer Olenskaya Inessa Vitalievna, October 07, 2017 Phone: +375296638674
Minsk Regional Bar Association, Minsk Regional Specialized Legal Consultation on Economic Affairs
What you need to know about interrogation...
Interrogation in the framework of a criminal trial is an investigative or judicial action consisting of obtaining testimony from a witness, victim, accused, or suspect about the circumstances of the case known to him.
Not a single criminal case is complete without interrogating the victim, witness or accused (suspect).
It is important to know how to behave correctly during interrogation, as this may later affect the outcome of the case.
Experienced investigators conduct interrogations using the method of psychological influence on the interrogated person.
Before answering questions, make sure that this is an interrogation that is documented in a protocol. Otherwise, you can safely refuse to answer questions, since this may turn out to be just a conversation in which the investigator will obtain the information he needs from you in a non-procedural manner.
This is especially true in cases when you are offered a petition to conclude a pre-trial cooperation agreement... You will tell everything you know, and the investigation will no longer need your help...
In addition, information obtained extra-procedurally is not evidence in a criminal case, but the investigator can use it to find facts confirming your guilt.
About the procedure for calling for questioning
According to Article 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Belarus, you must be summoned for questioning by a summons , which must indicate who is summoned and in what capacity, to whom and at what address, the time of appearance for questioning, as well as the consequences of failure to appear without good reason.
The summons is handed to the summoned person against receipt. In the absence of the summoned person, a subpoena is handed against signature to one of the adult members of his family or the administration at his place of work, who are obliged to hand over the summons to the summoned person for questioning. The interrogated person may be summoned using other means of communication (for example, a telephone message), and such a call must be formalized accordingly by the investigator.
The victim, witness, as well as the suspect and accused who are at large are required to appear when summoned for questioning. If they fail to appear without good reason, they may be brought in by reasoned decision of the inquiry body, investigator, prosecutor, public prosecutor, judge or by court ruling.
The person who received the summons must notify the authority that summoned him about the presence of reasons that prevent him from appearing when summoned on time (business trip, vacation, illness, etc.).
A person under sixteen years of age may be summoned for questioning as a victim or witness through his parents or other legal representatives.
You don’t have to come to the interrogation if you just found the summons in your mailbox. You do not bear any responsibility for this.
If you received the summons by registered mail, or from the hands of a police officer or employer, and you signed for its receipt, you will have to appear for questioning.
The subpoena itself must indicate in what capacity they want to interrogate you: a witness, a victim, a suspect or an accused. If the agenda does not contain such information, be sure to find it out. Your rights and responsibilities will depend on this.
You should know that being called in for questioning as a witness may mean not only that you are a witness to some events, but also that you could potentially become a suspect or accused.
Conducting an interrogation
As a rule, the interrogation is carried out in the investigator’s office, however, the investigator has the right, if he deems it necessary, to conduct the interrogation at the location of the interrogated person, incl. during investigative actions such as inspection, search or seizure.
At the beginning of the interrogation, the investigator must establish your identity and fill out personal information (last name, first name, patronymic, date of birth, place of residence, place of work, etc.).
The person summoned for interrogation is informed in what capacity, in what criminal case he will be interrogated, his rights and obligations are explained , including the right to refuse to give evidence in relation to himself, his family members and close relatives, about which mark in the protocol. A person summoned for questioning as a victim or witness is warned of criminal liability for refusal or evasion to testify and for giving knowingly false testimony.
If for some reason the investigator did not explain to you your rights and obligations, and you did not sign that you are familiar with them, the court may subsequently declare the interrogation record illegal (inadmissible evidence).
Having appeared for interrogation in any status (witness, victim, suspect, accused), you have the right at any time to have legal assistance from a lawyer , and the exercise of this right cannot be made dependent on the discretion of the body conducting the criminal process.
If you are interrogated as a suspect or accused, the investigator will ask you whether you know what you are suspected (accused) of, whether you plead guilty and whether you are willing to testify. In this situation, you can refuse to testify , since according to Article 27 of the Constitution of the Republic of Belarus, no one should be forced to give testimony and explanations against themselves, their family members, or close relatives. The circle of close relatives is determined by Art. 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Belarus: these are parents, children, adoptive parents, adopted children, siblings, grandparents, grandchildren, as well as spouse.
If the investigator forces you to testify, do not follow his lead: you decide not to answer questions - stick to this position.
If you decide to testify, it is important to remember the following.
The interrogation begins with an invitation to tell about the circumstances of the criminal case known to the person being interrogated. At the end of the free story, the interrogated may be asked questions aimed at clarifying and supplementing the testimony.
The investigator is basically free to choose interrogation tactics and can structure the interrogation as he sees fit, but acting within the framework of criminal procedural legislation, which establishes certain restrictions.
According to Part 4 of Art. 217 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Belarus, the investigator is prohibited from asking leading questions . Questions that contain an answer option or the answer itself should be considered leading. If such questions were present during the interrogation, then in court such interrogation can be considered illegal.
The investigator does not have the right to threaten the interrogated person, use violence, or create situations dangerous to life and health . If the investigator behaves aggressively, then try to remain calm. As a rule, the investigator just wants to scare you so that you will testify more easily. This may indicate that the investigator does not have evidence incriminating you.
The interrogation cannot last continuously for more than 4 hours. After this time, you have the right to request a break. Continuation of the interrogation is allowed after a break of at least one hour for rest and eating, and the total duration of the interrogation during the day should not exceed eight hours.
However, it is possible to terminate the interrogation earlier.
If there are medical indications, the duration of the interrogation is determined based on the doctor’s opinion.
Therefore, if you tell the investigator that you are not feeling well and cannot answer any more questions, he must call a doctor, and if there are medical indications, the interrogation will be postponed on their recommendation.
In accordance with the general requirement of the prohibition of investigative actions at night, interrogation from 22.00 to 6.00 hours is allowed to the investigator only in exceptional cases that cannot be delayed (Part 2 of Article 192 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Belarus).
The investigator must justify the impossibility of postponing the interrogation until the morning. Blog Olenskaya Inessa Vitalievna
Continuation. Repeated interrogation
And so Kolya and I arrived for interrogation.
Before our eyes, the charming investigator copies the text of the initial interrogation from the protocol on the computer and pastes it into the electronic form of the new protocol.
Then he asks a question.
— What did you want to add?
Nikolai began his testimony with the following words.
“I completely renounce the testimony I gave during interrogation as a suspect on such and such a date, since I gave it under pressure from police officers.”
— You wanted to add something? - the investigator screamed, - How can you refuse to understand? You were warned that if you agree to testify, this testimony will be evidence in the case even if you subsequently refuse it!
“Yes, I was warned,” said Nikolai, “And, nevertheless, I refuse them completely for the reason that I have already indicated to you.”
In a word, I had to convince the investigator to delete the text of the copied interrogation from the new protocol and begin the repeated interrogation with the words: “I completely refuse the testimony I gave during the interrogation as a suspect on such and such a date...”
And then the investigator’s psychological state was destined to deteriorate. This happened because Nikolai began to tell her his Sunday story exactly as it really happened. How he and his friend went shopping. How we met. How he deposited 500 rubles through a terminal in a communication shop on his friend Sergei’s phone.
— Sergei’s last name and address? – the investigator asked, puffing out her cheeks.
— I won’t say his last name, due to the fact that Sergei lives in general regime colony No.
The investigator turned purple. Her face, once pale from systematic lack of sleep, was filled with a seething volcanic mass of blood.
- What about the check that was confiscated from you?!
“Yes, the number should be written on the check,” Nikolai answered and added, “If, of course, you have the same check that was seized from me.”
- Continue! - blurted out the investigator with a charming face, slightly spoiled by the abundant flow of blood.
Continuing his new testimony, Nikolai told the investigator that, without having time to pick up a matchbox from the ground, in which he saw with one eye two packages of something resembling packages of condoms, he was immediately knocked to the ground by some bad guys .
He went on to tell how he and his friend were placed at the portals of the southern gate of the city park and were superficially searched, finding a box of “condoms” in his possession. As they asked: “Does he have items prohibited in civilian circulation, for example, drugs or weapons?” The answer was categorical - no.
Nikolai said that he was held for six hours at the police department, which has nothing to do with the territory of the city park. That throughout all this time the guys in civilian clothes told him about the events that happened to him today, but which he himself learned about for the first time only from them.
He told how, six hours later, the investigator arrived, and he gave his initial testimony, almost under the dictation of the detectives, with only one purpose, to escape from them on his own recognizance, otherwise, as the latter assured, the next point of his route would be the pre-trial detention center.
I will not describe the color scheme of our investigator’s face when she was hammering out Nikolai’s new testimony, constantly saying that certain circumstances were not relevant to the case. But we didn’t think so, so Nikolai talked and talked and talked. And the investigator, wincing, recorded all this in the protocol.
When Nikolai told her that all the outrage he told happened in the absence of any lawyer, including during his interrogation as a suspect, whose text was hammered down by whoever you think... Yes, the one who is hammering him down now. More precisely, the one that was now opposite Nikolai and me.
At that moment, her fingers went numb and completely refused to press the computer keys. My fingers were numb, but not my tongue. The investigator hysterically told us that only she was authorized to determine the course of the investigative action, and she would not record the latest testimony in the protocol.
I explained to her that she was obliged to record the suspect’s testimony in the form of a free narrative, verbatim. She did not want to agree with me and became increasingly hysterical.
At the investigator’s cry, the head of the department burst into the office and asked what was happening here. I had to explain to him that the investigator refused to record the testimony of my client. I just can’t understand whether it infuriates them that people refuse to give testimony, or that they themselves refuse to record their testimony. It's kind of a mess.
Perhaps this happened because the testimony was essentially given to the one who recorded this testimony. This conflict was resolved by the head of the investigative department, who ordered the investigator to write everything Nikolai said.
And Nikolai continued to talk about everything that he had talked to me about not so long ago.
I offered Nikolai a personal search protocol for review, a paragraph of text in which was written in ink of a completely different shade than the main text of the protocol. Let me remind you of the contents of this fragment of text: “When asked if you had any items prohibited in civil circulation, the person being examined replied that he had a box of spice, which he purchased for personal use.”
With the permission of the investigator, I asked my client a question:
— When you signed this protocol, did you read it? “Yes, I read it,” Nikolai answered. — Was this text in the protocol at the time you signed it? — I pointed him to the text above. “This text did not exist,” Nikolai answered.
The investigator tried to deflect my question, but apparently remembering the instructions of her boss, she wrote down both the question and the answer to it.
But the interrogation did not end there. His climax had arrived. Nikolai began to testify about how the search was carried out in his apartment... Our charming girl’s hands dropped down, and panic settled in her eyes.
“Write, write,” I said, encouraging her.
She wrote.
Finally, the girl decided for Nikolai herself.
— Did you call the number indicated in the protocol? - No, I didn’t call. I didn’t call anyone from my phone that day. - Why didn’t you call? “That’s it, I didn’t call and that’s it,” Nikolai answered her.
I took out from my briefcase a petition I had previously prepared to include in the case materials a printout of details of incoming and outgoing phone calls from Nikolai’s number on the day of his arrest.
The investigator, perplexed, looked at a very short certificate detailing Nikolai’s calls. From the contents of the certificate, it was clear that Nikolay received only three incoming calls that day, and not from the number that was involved in the case, and not a single outgoing one!
- What it is? How is it possible that you haven’t called anyone once in a whole day? I don't believe it, it's a linden tree! I'll make a request to the cellular company myself! “This is your right,” I said and continued, “But this certificate contains the answer to your doubt.” Pay attention to the balance...
The balance was zero. And it seemed to me that after the investigator carefully looked at the details, she not only turned her attention to the balance, but also understood why Nikolai never called anyone that day.
With this, our communication with the investigator finally ended. We didn't communicate with her anymore. For some reason she forgot about us. No hello, no answer.
If you are called in for questioning
No business is immune from criminal prosecution. And not a single criminal case is complete without interrogations. Anyone can appear before the investigator - as a victim, witness or accused. We will tell you how to behave correctly in this, without exaggeration, extreme situation. The outcome of the case will largely depend on this.
Summons for interrogation
Interrogation is an investigative action during which the investigator obtains information about a criminal case from the accused, victim or witness.
Usually the investigator interrogates in his office, which gives him a certain advantage. But if necessary, he can conduct an interrogation right in your office during an inspection, search or seizure. Before answering questions, ask whether it will be a survey (a conversation without a protocol) or an interrogation.
In the first case, you can safely refuse to answer questions. No one has the right to force you. If you still decide to answer, keep in mind: despite the fact that the information obtained during the interview is not evidence in a criminal case, the investigator can use it to find facts confirming your guilt.
You may be summoned for questioning by subpoena or by telephone.
If you find a subpoena in your mailbox or are summoned by telephone, you do not have to come to the interrogation. There are no sanctions for this.
If you received a summons from the hands of a local police officer or an investigator and signed for its receipt, it is better to appear when called. Otherwise, the operatives may forcibly bring you to the investigator. True, this applies only to witnesses and victims. If the accused has not signed an obligation to appear, he can ignore the investigator's call.
The subpoena must indicate in what capacity they want to interrogate you: a witness, a victim, a suspect or an accused. If the agenda does not contain such information, be sure to find it out. Your rights and responsibilities will depend on this.
Note:
being called as a witness may mean not only that you are a witness to some events, but also that you are a potential accused.
How is the interrogation going?
First, the investigator will establish your identity, that is, look at your passport, write down your last name, first name, patronymic and address. After this, he must explain your rights to you. If the investigator forgot to do this, do not remind him. In the future, you can declare the interrogation illegal.
The investigator will then ask you if you plead guilty and if you are willing to testify (if you are being questioned as a defendant). In this situation, you have a choice. You can refuse to testify because you have the right not to testify against yourself and your loved ones. This is stated in Article 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Close relatives include: spouses, parents, children, adoptive parents, adopted children, siblings, grandparents and grandchildren (Article 5 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation).
Note:
Police officers and prosecutors understand Article 51 of the Constitution in their own way. They believe that employees (director, accountant, etc.), summoned for questioning as witnesses, are obliged to answer questions because they testify not about themselves and their loved ones, but about the activities of the company.
If you come across just such an investigator, do not follow his lead: you decide not to answer questions - stick to this position. After all, any employee is involved in the activities of the company. The testimony he gives may harm him in the future. This means that Article 51 of the Constitution is also valid in this situation.
The investigator can structure the interrogation as he sees fit. But the law also provides for certain restrictions. Here they are.
The investigator does not have the right to ask leading questions, that is, questions that already contain an answer. For example: “Was it a dark green Niva?” In court, such interrogation can be considered illegal.
The investigator does not have the right to threaten the interrogated person, use violence, or create situations dangerous to life and health.
Currently, cases of physical influence on a witness or accused are rare. However, it happens that the investigator deliberately creates a frightening environment in the office by placing various objects (knives, batons, etc.) in a visible place, as if by chance, or displaying a pistol.
Don't pay any attention to it. The investigator just wants to scare you into giving evidence. And this is a sure sign that he has nothing on you.
You should also not be alarmed if you see in the investigator’s office a wooden machine that looks like a “bone crusher” and a hand or electric drill. They are used for stitching together sheets of a criminal case.
How to end an interrogation early
The interrogation cannot last continuously for more than 4 hours. If you still made it through 4 hours, but the interrogation is not over yet, ask for a break to rest and eat.
Ask to interrupt the interrogation earlier if you are tired or the investigator manages to stump you with a good question or by presenting incriminating evidence. To do this, state that you are not feeling well. However, be prepared for the fact that the investigator will not take your word for it and will call the doctors. Then the interrogation will be postponed only on their recommendation.
Example 1
During interrogation, the accused stated that he felt ill. The investigator called an ambulance. The doctor discovered a slight increase in blood pressure in the accused. Having given the necessary injection, he informed the investigator that the interrogation could be continued in 30 minutes.
The total duration of interrogation during the day cannot exceed 8 hours. If you are sick, the duration of the interrogation should be determined by your doctor. This is required by Article 187 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation.
Interrogation at night (from 23.00 to 6.00) is allowed only in exceptional cases (Part 3 of Article 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation). The investigator must justify the impossibility of postponing the interrogation until the morning.
Example 2
The investigator on duty received a message at 23.45 about the theft of property from the Okolitsa company. He went to the scene and inspected the company's warehouse from which the computers were stolen. The inspection was completed at 2.15 am. The watchman explained that he saw suspicious people near the company's territory. Fearing that the watchman would forget significant “trifles” and signs of suspicious citizens, the investigator interrogated him immediately.
How to answer questions
When answering the investigator's questions, adhere to the following rules.
First, ask why you were called. You may be able to understand how dangerous the situation is.
Talk to the investigator respectfully, using “you” and only by first name and patronymic, even if you are 20 years older.
Note:
The preliminary investigation in Russia is conducted in Russian. If you have a different nationality and it is easier for you to communicate in your native language, ask for a translator. We have no right to refuse you.
The investigator may ask you to tell everything you know. Don't rush to do this. So you can say too much. Ask to be asked specific questions. Don't say anything you haven't been asked about.
Keep your tone calm. Don't rush with your answers. If you answer any question after a short pause, the investigator will not be able to determine what you are willingly talking about and what you are trying to keep silent about.
Answer the questions as monosyllabically as possible: yes, no. Don't go into lengthy explanations. If in doubt, say: “I find it difficult to answer” or “I don’t remember.”
If you feel that by answering you will harm yourself, do not answer. Refer to Article 51 of the Constitution: no one can be forced to testify against themselves or their loved ones.
Under no circumstances should you sign a letter of refusal to have a lawyer. Don’t believe the investigator’s words: “Where can I find you a lawyer now?” He will find it, he just wants to make his life easier.
If you are offered to pay off, do not agree: this may be a provocation.
Interrogation protocol
During the interrogation, the investigator draws up a protocol. Usually he himself writes down your testimony, choosing from what was said what he considers necessary. Less often he offers to record the testimony with his own hand. This could mean that:
- he is indifferent to the result of the interrogation;
- in this way he wants to get samples of your handwriting.
After reading the protocol, do not rush to sign it, think about whether the meaning of the words you said is distorted. You can personally record your comments on the interrogation in the protocol. After that, put dashes in all empty lines.
You have the right to refuse to sign the protocol. In this case, the investigator will ask you to explain the reason for the refusal and will make a corresponding entry in the protocol. The presence of witnesses is not required.
Typical Investigator Mistakes
The following mistakes may be made during interrogation:
- the investigator inaccurately indicated your personal data in the protocol;
- the investigator did not pay attention to the fact that you did not sign all pages of the protocol;
- the investigator did not explain your rights to you or you did not sign in the required box;
- The investigator did not find out whether Russian is your native language and whether you need a translator.
If you notice any of these errors, under no circumstances tell the investigator about it. In the future, you can use them in court to declare the interrogation illegal.
Example 3
The investigator completed the interrogation of the witness on an old-style form. It did not contain a column about the rights of the interrogated person, provided for in Article 51 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and the investigator forgot to make a corresponding entry. The witness subsequently retracted his testimony. The court declared the first interrogation illegal.
Features of interrogation of the accused
The accused is a citizen who has been formally charged by the investigator. The investigator must interrogate the accused immediately after the accusation is filed. How this is done is written in detail in the “Initiation of a criminal case” section of the berator “If a case is opened against a business.”
If the accused refuses to testify during the first interrogation, repeated interrogation is possible only at his request.
The accused is not liable for perjury. This means you can change them as often as you like. However, keep in mind: the court will regard this as an attempt to evade responsibility. Still, it is better to refrain from giving evidence than to change it.
It is advisable that a lawyer be present at the interrogation. He will tell you how to answer questions. It is better to use the services of your own lawyer, trusted by friends or acquaintances. If this is not the case, contact a lawyer's office. If you are in custody, have a relative or friend do this for you.
Note:
An interrogation conducted without the participation of a lawyer is illegal. The exception is cases when the accused has refused a defense lawyer in writing.
Peculiarities of interrogation of witnesses and victims
The investigator can question any person as a witness if he believes that he knows something about the circumstances of the criminal case.
Citizens who suffered from the crime are interrogated as victims. The company may also be the victim. Then the investigator will interrogate her supervisor (or other legal representative).
The witness and the victim, unlike the accused, are liable for knowingly giving false testimony (Article 307 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).
The following sanctions are provided for this crime:
- fine up to 80,000 rubles;
- a fine in the amount of wages or other income of the convicted person for a period of up to six months;
- compulsory work for a period of 180 to 240 hours;
- correctional labor for up to two years;
- arrest for up to three months.
As practice shows, it is extremely rare for people to be held accountable for giving false testimony. Moreover, if you report false evidence before sentencing, no sanctions will be imposed on you at all.
Read more about the berator “If a case is opened against a business”
PRACTICAL ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AN ACCOUNTANT
Complete information about accounting rules and taxes for an accountant. Only a specific algorithm of actions, practical examples and expert advice. Nothing extra. Always up-to-date information.
Connect berator
Epilogue
About a month later, I learned from the head of the NON that the criminal prosecution against Nikolai had been discontinued.
But until now, by hook or by crook, he has refused to give me a copy of the decision to terminate the criminal prosecution. It seems to me that in fact the case was simply suspended for some far-fetched reasons in order to put the brakes on it. The preliminary investigation period ended two months ago. I wanted to send a written request for information about the progress of the investigation and the adoption of one or another procedural decision in the case, since the deadlines for its production provided by law have long expired. But I am afraid that the response may be the resumption of the preliminary investigation, or the cancellation of the decision to terminate the criminal prosecution, depending on their decision.
PS Friends and colleagues, I offer for your consideration my small book in electronic PDF format, which you can download to your computer by clicking on the link below.
Book here
The essence of the interrogation and the grounds for its conduct
Note 1
Interrogation is an investigative action regulated by criminal procedural legislation, which is based on communication in the form of a conversation in order to establish the circumstances and facts of the crime, the persons who committed it, obtain new information that has any significance for the effective consideration and resolution of the case essence.
A unified procedural procedure for interrogation determines the common nature of the testimony of the victim, witness, accused and suspect. The features of the interrogation are determined by the criminal procedural status of the interrogated persons. Interrogation differs from other types of communication in that the procedure for its production is regulated by the criminal procedure law.
Are you an expert in this subject area? We invite you to become the author of the Directory Working Conditions
Grounds for questioning:
- The material grounds for interrogation are data that indicate that a person has information and data that are important for the correct consideration of a criminal case.
- The procedural grounds for interrogation are a summons or other message calling a person for interrogation.
Procedural procedure for interrogation
The procedural procedure for conducting interrogation provides that this investigative action can be carried out at the place of investigation or at the location of the accused and, as a rule, during the daytime. The interrogated person testifies in private with the investigator, except in cases expressly provided for by law (the presence of a defense attorney, teacher, legal representatives or close relatives of the minor accused).
The procedural order of interrogation consists of three stages:
1) introductory;
2) a free story from the interrogated;
3) questions from the investigator.
The purpose of the introductory stage is to fulfill the relevant requirements of the criminal procedure law, obtain from the interrogated the necessary data about his personality, create conditions for him to freely present his testimony about the circumstances included in the subject of interrogation, deeply study the personality of the interrogated and create the most favorable conditions for the implementation of the intended tactics interrogation
Before the interrogation, the investigator, if necessary, verifies the identity of the interrogated person, explains to him his rights and obligations, and finds out the necessary questionnaires. At the beginning of the interrogation, the investigator must ask the interrogated whether he pleads guilty to the charges brought against him, after which he invites the interrogated to testify on the merits of the case. The investigator listens to the testimony of the person being interrogated and then, if necessary, asks him questions.
If during the conversation the investigator notices that the person being interrogated is hiding something about himself or is providing false information, he can immediately expose him in a lie and thereby prevent possible lies on the subject of the interrogation.
The introductory stage of the interrogation is followed by a free story, when, for example, the suspect in the form of a story gives evidence regarding the suspicions against him, and the witness and the victim - about everything that is known to him in the case.
A free story can cover the entire subject of interrogation, but can be limited to a single fact, episode, etc. A free story contributes to a more accurate transmission of what he perceived in connection with the circumstances of the case under investigation. The interrogated person's free presentation of his testimony has important tactical significance. In order to understand the attitude of the interrogated to giving evidence, the investigator pays attention to how the interrogated states his testimony, what words he chooses, what he emphasizes, what he tries to circumvent or smooth out, in what cases he allows unreasonably long pauses, what is his intonation, facial expressions, gestures . During the story, the investigator may suggest not to deviate from the circumstances being investigated and to stay closer to the subject of the interrogation.
The free story of the accused during his first interrogation begins with the answer to the question posed by the investigator about whether he pleads guilty to the charges brought against him.
The interrogation of an accused who fully admits guilt is conflict-free, with the exception of cases of self-incrimination or attempts to hide from the investigation or downplay the guilt of any of the accomplices. However, the non-conflict nature of the interrogation situation does not mean that the role of the investigator is reduced only to recording the testimony given by the accused. The accused must give detailed testimony on all circumstances to be proven in the case. These should not be general statements about guilt and the nature of the crime committed. While actively conducting an interrogation, it is important for the investigator to obtain detailed data not only about the crime itself, but also its causes, motives, preparation, circumstances that contributed to the commission of the crime, methods of concealing traces of the crime and the criminal.
The guiding role of the investigator at this stage of the interrogation is to determine the sequence of the investigator’s presentation of the circumstances of the case during a free story; unless absolutely necessary, he should not interrupt the interrogated person, rush him, or express his opinion about the testimony.
In some cases, a free story may be preceded by questions that lead the interrogated person to the desired topic; this is necessary in the case when the interrogated person did not realize the criminal nature of the fact or event he perceived.
At the end of the free story, the investigator asks questions to the interrogated person. It is very important, by asking the necessary questions, not only to complete and clarify the evidence received, but also to obtain data with the help of which they can be verified and confirmed by other evidence. This is necessary due to the fact that the confession of the accused, not supported by other evidence, cannot form the basis for a conviction.
The sequence of clarification and examination of the circumstances of the case during the interrogation of the accused is especially carefully thought out. The investigator, based on the general tactical line, pre-divides the subject of interrogation of these persons into certain parts. He decides in what sequence (in chronological order or in breakdown, moving from the particular to the general or vice versa, starting with the purpose of criminal actions and then moving on to clarifying the actual circumstances or vice versa) the circumstances of interest should be clarified. If the interrogated person can evade giving truthful testimony or give knowingly false testimony, then first of all it is advisable to find out the circumstances that have been most fully and reliably investigated in the case. First of all, the interrogated person is asked more general questions, and then specific ones, which are divided into basic (related to the entire subject of interrogation), supplementary (to fill in the gaps in a free story), and control (checking the authenticity of the message).
The interrogation of an accused who partially admits guilt differs from that described in that, along with truthful testimony, the investigator has to deal with false testimony within the framework of one interrogation, and, therefore, solve the problem of exposing the interrogated person to a lie, as in the interrogation of an accused person who completely denies his guilt. guilt.
The interrogation of the accused is carried out on the charges against him. The defendant’s positive answer to the question posed at the beginning of the interrogation about whether he admits guilt should not affect the need for a full, comprehensive and objective investigation of the criminal case.
With his testimony, the accused confirms or denies his guilt - personal involvement or non-involvement in the event under investigation.
The accused is not criminally liable for refusing to testify or for giving false testimony, since they are always interested in a favorable outcome of the case. The law does not oblige them to act to the detriment of their interests. Forcing the accused to testify is punishable by law.
Thus, the sequence and determination of the priority of the questions asked gave a positive result in the investigation of a criminal case.
The testimony of the interrogated person is recorded in the protocol in the first person and, if possible, verbatim. If necessary, the protocol records both the questions asked of the interrogated person and his answers. After giving testimony, the interrogated person, if requested, must be given the opportunity to write his testimony in his own hand. At the end of the interrogation, the protocol is presented to the interrogated for reading or, at his request, is read out by the investigator. The correctness of the recording of testimony is certified by the signatures of the interrogated person and the investigator.
Interrogation can only be carried out after a criminal case has been initiated. Only the person in charge of the criminal case, as well as the supervising prosecutor, have the right to conduct interrogation.
The interrogation is carried out on the initiative of the investigator or interrogating officer. But they can also be carried out on the instructions of the prosecutor, the head of the investigative department, or the head of the inquiry agency.
The law establishes cases of mandatory interrogation. After arrest, a person must be interrogated as a suspect; after the presentation of charges, the interrogation of the accused must immediately follow.
The investigator is obliged to ensure the protection of the rights and interests of citizens during interrogation. The law prohibits, during its production, from committing actions that humiliate the honor and dignity of citizens or are associated with a danger to life and health. It is prohibited to solicit testimony from interrogated persons through violence, threats and other illegal measures, or to carry out investigative actions at night, except in urgent cases.
Basic requirements for interrogation:
1) Legality.
2) Non-disclosure of the circumstances of the intimate life of the interrogated.
3) Inadmissibility of interrogation at night (except in urgent cases).
4) Inadmissibility of actions that violate moral rules.
The question of the admissibility of tactical techniques or so-called “investigative tricks” and their correspondence with the concept of deception remains controversial in science and practice. In our opinion, deception is the provision of false information to the interrogated person. For example, if an investigator tells a suspect that an accomplice has been detained and is giving truthful testimony, when this is not the case, then in this case such a message must be considered as deception.
To begin an investigative action, the investigator must issue a resolution to carry out the investigative action. During an inspection, search, seizure, examination, presentation for identification, investigative experiment, seizure of property, at least two witnesses must be present.
The investigator is obliged to explain to the participants in the investigative action their rights and obligations, which is noted in the protocol.
A protocol on the interrogation is drawn up during the investigative action or immediately after its completion by the investigator (Code of Criminal Procedure of the Republic of Kazakhstan, Art. 212).
The following general conditions for conducting an investigative action are identified:
The presence of a criminal case.
The presence of a special basis for carrying out this particular investigative action.
The investigative action is carried out by the person who accepted the case for proceedings, or on his behalf.
Logging. The results and progress of the investigative action are documented in a protocol. Without drawing up an appropriate protocol, conducting an investigative action is meaningless.
Everything depends on the situation in which the decision to carry out an investigative action is made (on the stage of the investigation, the volume of evidence, on the nature and direction of the planned action, the conditions for its production). In some cases, when there is both a need and an opportunity for this, preparation for interrogation is carried out according to a full program, in other cases - according to a curtailed, abbreviated program, when only what cannot be done without is done. Thus, if a decision is made under conditions of daily or other operational duty, the investigator usually performs a minimum of preparatory measures. He uses those organizational, personnel and technical capabilities that are previously placed at his disposal under the conditions of duty (special vehicles, forensic equipment, weapons, specialists). In such cases, in order to promptly respond to an incident, the preparation of signal information can be reduced to briefing members of the operational investigation team, discussing the initial data, and preliminary outlining what is to be done.
Compliance with all these rules is of great importance, since evidence obtained during interrogation in violation of the law is recognized as having no legal force and cannot be the basis for further filing of charges.
