Article 190 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation. Interrogation protocol (current version)

Theft is a fairly common crime in our reality. Sometimes a person is unreasonably accused of committing a given act. In the event of a theft (Article 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), the assistance of a lawyer may be needed not only by the suspect (accused), but also by the witness and the victim. Read our material about the role of a lawyer in cases involving theft.

ATTENTION: one way or another, theft is a serious article contained in the criminal code. And the presence of a conviction on it does not bode well - that’s why our criminal lawyer will become your assistant.

The difference between theft and other crimes

First, let's figure out what theft is and how it differs from other compounds. According to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, theft is the secret theft of someone else's property. Committing theft secretly distinguishes theft from robbery (Article 161 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation), when someone else's property is stolen openly in front of someone else's eyes. If robbery is associated with an attack for the purpose of theft, then this is already robbery (Article 162 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

So, the following signs of theft can be identified:

• ♦ the subject of theft is someone else’s property;
• ♦ the theft actions carried out are secret, i.e. no one sees how the theft is committed or third parties see, but the person does not know that someone is seeing the crime being committed, in this case also his actions will be qualified as theft;
• ♦ when committing theft, there is a selfish goal, i.e. a person wants to enrich himself, take possession of someone else’s property, and subsequently, perhaps, dispose of it at his own discretion;
• ♦ as a result of the actions committed, the owner of the stolen item suffers damage.

It should be noted that the theft of certain things withdrawn from circulation, for example, narcotic drugs, ammunition, etc., forms its own independent offenses. Under certain circumstances, a crime that has begun, such as theft, can develop into another crime, for example, robbery, robbery.

ATTENTION: watch a video about defending the rights of the accused by a lawyer and subscribe to our YouTube channel, you will have access to free legal assistance from a lawyer through comments on the video.

Lawyer for theft suspect

When summoned for questioning, a person suspected of committing theft must be provided with a lawyer.

A person who is suspected of theft, but in fact has not committed criminal acts, will especially need the help of a lawyer. The participation of a lawyer in such situations will help avoid pressure from investigative authorities. The lawyer will also analyze the essence of the questions asked and, if the questions are leading, will tell the investigator about this. In addition, the lawyer of the Law Office “Katsailidi and Partners” will have the right to bring comments, objections to investigative actions, and appeal the actions of the investigator when concluding an agreement with our organization.

The very fact of the presence of a lawyer during interrogations of a suspect will discipline the investigator and will help not to violate the rights of the suspect, who, for example, must always carefully read what the investigator has written before signing anything.

The lawyer will take all actions in his power to prove the innocence of his client, for example, to confirm the suspect’s alibi. The lawyer can also contact the investigator with requests to send certain requests, the answers to which can confirm the innocence of the person he is protecting.

What the lawyer’s tactics will be when defending his client depends on what information the suspect provides him with, in particular about the location at the time of the theft, where the theft was committed, whether the suspect had access to the premises in which the theft was committed, etc.

What if a subpoena was issued, but was not received by the person summoned?

The possibility of holding a person accountable for failure to appear or evasion of appearing for questioning will depend not only on the very fact of receiving or not receiving a subpoena, but on the reasons why the subpoena was not received.

If there was an objective obstacle that prevented the receipt of the summons, for example, the summons was sent by the tax authority, but due to the fault of the post office the correspondence was not delivered, then the summoned person will not be held accountable.

If the summons was not received, for example, because the person does not live at the place of registration, then failure to receive the summons will not be recognized by the court as a valid reason for failure to appear for questioning. Appeal ruling of the Supreme Court of the Chuvash Republic dated May 4, 2016 in case No. 33a-2144/2016.

Let us remind you that when sending a summons by registered mail, such a letter is considered received on the sixth day from the date of sending the registered letter.p. 4 tbsp. 31 Tax Code of the Russian Federation

Lawyer for the accused of theft

The difference between a suspect and an accused is that in relation to the accused, the investigator makes a decision to charge him as an accused, as well as to charge him with theft; accordingly, the investigator is sure that it was this person who stole the property of the victim. The lawyer's role at this stage will be the same as when working with a suspected person, if the accused does not admit his guilt.

If the accused admits his guilt, the lawyer will tell you how to act in this case so that the sentence is as lenient as possible. There may be grounds for terminating the criminal case, the lawyer will also inform his client about this, and taking into account the decision of the accused, the lawyer will take further actions together with the accused aimed at meeting all the conditions for terminating the criminal case.

Lawyer for the victim regarding the crime of theft

A victim who is far from jurisprudence and criminal proceedings may need the help of a lawyer if he is afraid of investigative authorities, interrogations, etc., if he does not know how to act in the current situation. The victim has the right to go for questioning with a lawyer, as well as participate with him in other actions, including in court proceedings. In addition, the lawyer will help the victim in a criminal case file a claim to recover causative damage from the accused.

If the investigator suddenly dropped the criminal case against the accused person or refused to initiate a case, then the lawyer will help draw up and file a complaint against such a procedural decision of the investigator, justifying why it is illegal. Can also take part in the consideration of the complaint.

During the judicial investigation, the lawyer will tell the victim how to behave in court. Protecting the interests of the client, the lawyer will prove that the actions of the defendant caused damage to the victim.

USEFUL: for more information about protecting the victim, follow the link, and also watch the video from YouTube

Can interrogation only be part of a tax audit?

Is it possible to conduct an interrogation before the inspection, during its suspension and after its completion?

The Tax Code of the Russian Federation again does not give an unambiguous answer.

In July 2013, the Resolution of the Plenum of the Supreme Arbitration Court of the Russian Federation dated July 30, 2013 No. 57 was issued, in which the following explanations were given (clauses 26, 27 of the Resolution):

• The interrogation can be carried out before the start of the tax audit;
• during the suspension of a tax audit, interrogation of the taxpayer’s employees is not allowed, but only on the territory of the taxpayer;
• at the same time, during the suspension of the inspection, interrogation is possible outside the taxpayer’s territory.

As for conducting interrogations after the end of a tax audit, the approaches in judicial practice are different, but the following trends can be identified:

• The interrogation protocol drawn up after the end of the audit, but before the decision is made, is not adequate evidence if the taxpayer has not been familiar with it. Resolution of the AS VSO dated November 1, 2018 No. F-02-5141/2018 in case No. A33-32012/2017 The reasoning can be continued: if the witness was familiar with the protocol, then such a protocol is admissible as evidence;
• the interrogation protocol drawn up after the end of the tax audit (during the consideration of the case by the court) is inadequate evidence; Resolution of the Arbitration Court of the Volga District dated February 13, 2017 N F06-7969/2016 in case No. A55-11768/2015; Resolution of the Arbitration Court of the Central District dated August 16, 2019 No. F10-3403/2019 in case No. A62-8847/2017
• Interrogation protocols drawn up after a decision was made based on the results of a tax audit cannot be considered adequate evidence, except in cases where the tax authority could not conduct an interrogation during the audit. Resolution of the Arbitration Court of the West Siberian District dated 06/07/2019 No. F04-2040/2019 in case No. A67-8642/2017.

Lawyer for a witness in a theft case

A witness in a criminal case can also benefit from the assistance of a lawyer. The presence of a lawyer will give the witness confidence, since during the interrogation of the witness the lawyer will ensure that the investigator does not go beyond what is permitted and does not try to put pressure on the witness, pushing the witness to say not what he knows, but what the investigator wants to hear.

Sometimes witnesses use the assistance of lawyers during questioning in court. The atmosphere in a trial is always tense, especially when there is a judge, a prosecutor, the suspect's lawyer, the suspect himself and the victims. The role of the witness's lawyer in this case is to ensure that the rights of his client are not violated.

A situation may arise that the witness is somehow involved in the theft committed by the accused; in this case, the witness has the right not to testify against himself; the lawyer will always warn the witness about such moments and tell him how to behave.

What will a lawyer do regarding theft?

When participating in a theft case, when a lawyer represents the interests of a person brought to criminal liability, the tactics of his actions will depend on the circumstances of the case, whether his client admits guilt or not.

If the suspect or accused is not found guilty, the lawyer will first of all find out where his client was at the time of the theft. For this purpose, the lawyer can try to find some witnesses who were not questioned by the investigation, who would confirm his client’s alibi, as well as witnesses who could have been eyewitnesses to the crime.

In order to establish the location of the suspect by phone number, the lawyer will contact the investigator so that he sends a request about the location of a specific subscriber at the time of the crime.

• If during the preliminary investigation the investigator commits violations, including violations of the rights of the person being prosecuted, the lawyer will draw up and file a complaint against the actions of the investigator.
• If the case goes to court, then during the trial the lawyer will ask questions to the witnesses, compare their testimony for consistency with the case materials, and also evaluate the inconsistency of the testimony.
• If any evidence is inadmissible, the lawyer will request that it be excluded from evidence.

The lawyer will also collect characterizing material about the defendant. As a rule, material is collected that positively characterizes the defendant at his place of work, place of residence, place of study, etc.

• If the defendant admits his guilt, the lawyer will explain possible options for terminating the criminal case, for example, in connection with reconciliation with the victim, as well as for other reasons.

Interrogation of the victim, witness

The main importance of conducting an interrogation of the victim at the initial stage of the investigation of thefts committed by minors is to find out information representing the characteristics of juvenile criminals, their appearance features, how the theft was committed, the place where the theft was committed, traces and weapons of the theft, harm caused to the victim, private and general signs of stolen property, as well as information about possible eyewitnesses to the crime committed.

It is advisable to conduct the interrogation of the victim immediately after the end of the examination. Immediate interrogation of the victim gives the investigator the opportunity to timely obtain information about persons related to the theft, which will make it possible to organize the detention of a minor offender “hot on the trail”; identify general and specific signs of stolen valuables and determine likely places of sale; prevent the victim from forgetting the details of the theft; to prevent possible and further negative influence on the behavior of the victim during the preliminary investigation from persons having an interest in the outcome of the case (the suspect, his relatives, etc.). And on the contrary, a delay in interrogating the victim, which is not uncommon in the practical activities of investigative bodies, can generally lead to zero results.

For example, suspect D. gave confessional, truthful, in the opinion of the investigation, testimony regarding the theft of an IZH motorcycle and spare parts from citizen N., but claimed that the motorcycle he stole was without an engine. Having learned about this, the victim began to insist that the motorcycle was equipped with an engine and demanded compensation for material damage in full. This led to a conflict situation with the victim, as D. began to deny his involvement in the crime. A search of the suspect did not yield positive results. Later, the investigator explained to the victim that the discovery of the engine is the missing link in the chain of evidence to send the criminal case to court, to compensate the victim for material damage objectively caused by the theft. Then the latter admitted that he had given untruthful testimony and gave the investigation the engine of an IZH motorcycle, which he kept at his place of residence. [15].

When preparing for the interrogation of a victim in cases of thefts committed by minors, efforts should be made to study the personality of the interrogated person and the characteristics of his psyche. When determining the start time of the interrogation of the victim, the investigator should proceed from the standard rule - the sooner, the more effective in order to prevent the possibility of the victim losing from the memory of individual details and circumstances of the theft.

Taking into account the circumstances of a specific theft committed by minors, and the investigative situation in the theft case available at the time of interrogation of the victim, the investigator must try to obtain from the victim complete answers to questions such as:

- who, when and in what circumstances revealed the fact of the theft;

— were any changes made at the crime scene, if so, by whom, what, and for what purpose;

- quantity, general and frequent signs of stolen property, its value (it is necessary to check for individual numbered items - TV, camera, watches, securities, etc., their brand, type, number, availability of technical passports, factory labels, labels or samples, similar to stolen items);

- where the stolen property was located: in the public domain or in a closed place unknown to unauthorized persons;

— whether anyone knew about it and who had access to it;

- who, when and in what circumstances saw the stolen property where it was left by the victim;

- whether the offender made any changes to the environment in which the property was stored;

- who is the owner of the stolen property (the victim or other persons, institutions, organizations;

- what financial situation does the victim have, what is its proportionality with the total total damage received by the victim as a result of the theft;

— can the victim identify the material assets stolen from him;

- if minors commit theft from an apartment, what daily routine do the residents of this apartment have? whether the apartment remained open or locked at the time of the theft;

- who had the keys to the door to the apartment or where they were kept and whether anyone could have known about it;

- who from the close circle of friends of the victim or his family members often came to his apartment or was interested in his daily routine, the presence and place of storage of valuable property; does anyone show interest in the progress of the preliminary investigation;

- whether there were strangers in the victim’s apartment under any pretext before the theft;

- which, from the point of view of the victim, contributed to the theft by minors or facilitated the theft, who might have known about these favorable conditions.

This list of questions is, of course, non-exhaustive. Based on the specific situation of theft committed by minors, which arose at the time of the interrogation of the victim in the investigative situation in the criminal case, as well as the importance of the victim’s personality in the formation of criminal intent among juvenile offenders, his position and behavior in the process of investigating the criminal case, the range of issues identified may be expanded and supplemented.

Among the main tactical techniques for interrogating a victim, the following can be identified: expressing attention and sympathy for the victim and the events that happened to him; showing respect for the victim; balanced, calm tone of conversation; consistency and sequence of questions asked (questions must be arranged based on the principle “from the general to the specific”, maintaining the logic of their formulation).

To clarify the testimony of the victim, questions may be asked during interrogation in the following blocks: 1) finding out the place where the theft was committed by minors; 2) clarifying the conditions and specific time of detection of the theft; 3) finding out the method used by juvenile offenders to commit theft; 4) description of the stolen valuables; 5) whether the victim has any assumptions about the identity of the criminals.

The testimony of witnesses who know anything about the circumstances of the theft are extremely important for the prompt detection of thefts committed by minors. Speaking about thefts committed by minors, we can distinguish the following groups of witnesses: 1) persons unfamiliar to the minor suspect who accidentally became eyewitnesses to certain circumstances of the theft; 2) eyewitnesses of the theft who are friends or acquaintances of the minor suspect.

For example, D., a suspect in theft, presented an alibi to the investigator, according to which he was at his friend N.’s place during the commission of the crime. The latter, questioned as a witness, also categorically stated that the suspect was indeed at her place of residence at the indicated time. time. Then the investigator inquired about D.’s whereabouts on another date and time, when the suspect was under interrogation at the police department at the second specified time. N. again began to assert that D. was with her at that time too. In this case, there was a deliberate falsity of the testimony given by the witness [16].

In the event that the witness is a person familiar with the suspects, it is tactically advisable, in addition to clarifying the circumstances of the crime committed, to find out the personality characteristics of the suspects, their time spent together, their circle of common interests and acquaintances, as well as what leisure groups they belonged to.

If the witness is a minor who was an accomplice to the crime, but due to the fact that he has not reached the age of criminal responsibility, he is not subject to such, it is tactically advisable to carefully find out the circumstances of the case, as well as, in the shortest possible time, obtain the necessary information about the remaining accomplices of the theft to find them hot pursuit and detention.

During the questioning of witnesses, the following questions must be clarified:

1) at what time, where and in what way the theft was committed;

2) how many criminals there were, their signs; what tools, objects, and devices were used in the commission of the crime;

3) what property was stolen and who it belongs to, in what direction the wanted people fled;

4) where the witness was at the time of the crime;

5) for what reason and under what circumstances the interrogated person appeared at the scene of the incident;

6) whether the witness knows the victim or the criminals;

7) who else could have seen this crime, etc.

It can be concluded that the purpose of interrogating witnesses and victims in cases of theft of minors is to obtain complete and objectively reflective testimony.

Interrogation of a suspect

The interrogation of a minor suspect has a number of features determined by the moral and psychological characteristics of the specified age group. It should be noted:

- less knowledge and life experience than adults;

- poor concentration;

- increased suggestibility;

- less development of analytical skills when perceiving and evaluating what is perceived;

- the tendency to confuse what is actually perceived and what is imagined;

— emotionality of judgments and actions.

Particularly difficult is the interrogation of a minor suspect, who must be treated with a special approach. On the one hand, there is not yet sufficient evidence to bring charges, and on the other hand, this is still not a witness who is obviously not involved in the crime under investigation, and therefore he is given the right to defense. Before interrogation, he must be told what he is suspected of (Article 189 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation).

The interrogation of a minor suspect must be carried out immediately if he is detained or taken into custody. This, however, does not exclude the preliminary carrying out with his participation of those investigative actions that can refute the suspicion that has arisen or, on the contrary, confirm participation in the crime. If a suspect is detained, which parents or other legal representatives do not know about, the investigator is obliged to immediately report this, familiarizing him with the facts charged to the teenager. Before inviting them to participate in the interrogation of a minor, it is necessary to find out as far as possible. If there are no obstacles to this, it is advisable to contact the legal representative with a request to help establish the truth, to explain the purpose and forms of his participation in the interrogation.

When preparing to interrogate a juvenile suspect, the investigator must consider how to begin the interrogation. The first phrase with which he addresses him is very important. In cases where the detention or arrest of a minor suspect is carried out by police officers, and he sees the investigator for the first time, it is necessary to identify himself to the suspect. If the suspect is depressed or frightened (which is quite natural during detention or arrest), it is advisable to tell him a few encouraging phrases even before the official part of the interrogation begins. If the interrogation is properly organized, the juvenile suspect should feel that he is not accused of anything and that his explanations can completely dispel the suspicions that have arisen against him, if they are unfounded. During interrogation, it is advisable to avoid terms such as “criminal”, “theft”, “robbery”, “guilt”, “guilty”. Not to mention the fact that the investigator, as a rule, does not yet have enough grounds for such statements; all these terms cause fear in the minor and intensify his attempts to avoid responsibility, in particular, by giving false testimony. A minor, like an adult, should be approached objectively so that he understands that the investigator is trying to find out the truth and does not intend to accuse him at any cost. A calm, confident and at the same time friendly tone is an indispensable condition for establishing contact with a minor. Even a daring and poorly behaved teenager quickly understands that it is stupid to take a hostile position towards investigators who are friendly towards him. At the same time, this must be combined with the necessary persistence and firmness so that the interrogated person understands the seriousness of the situation. If a minor regards the investigator’s benevolence and restraint as a manifestation of his weakness, and tries to be rude or behave cheekily, this should be stopped immediately.

Thus, in criminal case No. 03/2012 [17] on charges against Biryukov E.M. in committing crimes under Art. Art. 161 part 1, 162 part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, accused Biryukov E.M. refused to testify on the merits of the case. When studying the personality, it was found that Biryukov E.M. He was brought up in a dysfunctional family, his mother abused alcohol, and there was constant swearing, fights and scandals at home. A calm, friendly, friendly tone helped to establish contact with the accused, after which he gave truthful testimony.

Many crimes include a number of episodes or individual offenses, so the investigator at the first stages can pretend that he is mainly interested in individual circumstances or actions. When all the circumstances surrounding the episode have been clarified and contact with the minor has been established, one should gradually move on to clarifying the crime as a whole.

This is what happened during the investigation of criminal case No. 03/2011 [18] on charges of minors Fedorov, Ignatov and Petrov of committing a number of crimes under Article 158 Part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. These persons testified that they had committed one theft during the night, but after interrogating all the participants in the crime and comparing their testimonies, contradictions were discovered regarding the place and time of the crimes. In this regard, repeated interrogations of Fedorov, Ignatov and Petrov were carried out. As a result of which, when studying certain circumstances, it became possible to restore the full picture of not one, but a whole series of crimes committed by them that night.

The tactics of interrogating a suspect in a theft case largely depend on whether it is obvious to the investigator that the person being interrogated has committed a crime or whether serious doubts arise as to whether the person being interrogated committed the crime. If this is obvious, then the investigator’s behavior should be more persistent, otherwise he should behave very carefully and prudently. This is explained by the fact that a teenager, whose psyche is usually more vulnerable than that of an adult, painfully experiences the injustice shown to him, is imbued with hatred of the investigator, and most often withdraws. Therefore, if there is no confidence in the guilt of a minor, one should take a neutral, wait-and-see position. Even in cases where it is obvious that the suspect has committed a crime, it is not recommended to rush to expose him. It is better to express the hope that the interrogated person regrets what he did and, of course, will tell the truth. If an adult suspect usually immediately strives to give an explanation regarding the grounds for suspicion and the application of coercive measures against him, then a minor, on the contrary, is more willing to answer questions about his life, interests, etc., than about his involvement in a crime.

The interrogation of a suspect in a theft case should help the investigator find the answer to the question of whether his development is appropriate for his age and whether there is a reason that would prevent the minor from realizing the social significance of his actions. It is known that this circumstance, if confirmed, excludes criminal liability and it should be clarified, if possible, before, and not after, the filing of charges. In general, this issue is resolved by psychological and psychiatric examination, but the need for its production is established by studying the data characterizing the teenager.

Preparation for interrogation of a minor suspect who committed theft begins with studying the materials of the criminal case, determining urgent investigative actions that can fully illuminate the circumstances of the crime committed, its participants and, to a certain extent, the role of each of them, information characterizing the personality of the offender. It is also necessary to determine in advance the circle of persons participating in the interrogation - a defense lawyer, representatives, teachers, etc. It is important to determine the place and time for filing charges and interrogating a minor as an accused. Practice has shown that it is advisable to plan the filing of charges against a minor and his interrogation in the morning, when adolescents are least emotionally excited and not tired. During interrogations lasting several hours, in cases of obvious fatigue of the interrogated person, breaks should be taken, recording this in the interrogation protocols.

It is also necessary in advance for the investigator to correctly develop and choose his line of behavior when communicating with the accused. The atmosphere when communicating with a teenager should be serious, strict, but at the same time calm. Familiarity towards a minor should not be allowed; he must constantly feel the line between himself and the investigator, but he should not be overly stern and official. It is not forbidden to call a minor “you,” since this form of communication with a teenager is recognized as generally accepted. As a rule, in practice, this communication is used with adolescents aged 14–16 years; on the contrary, with accused persons aged 16–18 years, communication on “you” may be more appropriate, since this demonstrates respect for the dignity of the person being interrogated. It is necessary to stop the attempts of a minor accused to take a careless pose, show disrespect for the investigator, use slang, offensive expressions and immediately stop any other manifestations of cheekiness on the part of the interrogated person, since the interrogation of minors is not only a way of obtaining evidence, but also a method of educational influence.

The accusation brought against a minor must be extremely justified and motivated, stated in terms understandable to the accused. If the investigator is not afraid that this may disrupt his tactical plan, it is advisable to include a reference to evidence in the decision to bring the person as an accused. With the help of this, a minor can be created to believe that the investigator already knows basically everything and it is useless to try to mislead him[19].

Determining whether a minor pleads guilty should be preceded by a patient and detailed explanation of what he is suspected of. It is necessary to clearly and simply explain the meaning of the legal terms contained in the resolution, the essence of the charge and the legal qualification of the crime.

It is advisable to invite the minor to present his testimony, starting from the period preceding the crime, in order to subsequently consistently approach the right moment. If it is necessary to find out the circumstances of a complex event, the topic should be broken down into the simplest episodes, thereby making it easier for the accused to testify.

It is common for minors to admit their guilt. Studies show that the vast majority of minors in cases of theft (88.5%) plead guilty to the crimes committed. This is explained by the fact that teenagers, as a rule, do not prepare in advance for a crime, do not develop a system for hiding traces, and do not think through references to an alibi. Typically, juvenile crimes are situational, spontaneous in nature, often escalating from mischief, idle time on the street, and often associated with the use of alcoholic beverages and drugs[20].

According to Article 173 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, the interrogation of a minor suspect begins with the accused giving evidence on the merits of the facts of which he is suspected. This is the so-called free story. But it should be remembered that it is not so easy to obtain a sufficiently detailed story from a teenage offender - the level of general development of the interrogated person, the lack of habit and ability to consistently and thoroughly talk about any events, and clearly express their thoughts, is affected.

A characteristic feature of the interrogation of a minor accused is the fact that the presentation of charges and subsequent interrogation are carried out with the participation of a defense lawyer. As a rule, the presence of a defense attorney has a positive effect on the teenager’s behavior during interrogation. He knows that a defense attorney is a person representing his interests, who, by virtue of his procedural position, is obliged to identify circumstances that justify or mitigate the guilt of the accused. This convinces the minor of the objectivity of the investigation and facilitates obtaining truthful testimony from him.

When listening to a juvenile suspect in a theft case, you should closely monitor him in order to understand his position: what worries him, what he is concerned about, whether he is guilty or whether the charges are unfounded. When persuading a minor to give truthful testimony, you need to explain to him why this is important, first of all, for him[21].

So, DD.MM.YYYY in the period from 19 o'clock. 30 min. until 21 o'clock 40 min. Minor Lesnikov A.V. was in the house at the address: <address>, where he saw an unlocked door to <address>, where Ya, who was previously unknown to him, lived. At this time, Lesnikov A.V. a criminal intent arose aimed at secretly stealing someone else's property, causing significant damage to a citizen, and illegally entering a home. He stole a permit to carry a traumatic weapon in the name of Ya. of no material value, a driver's license in the name of Ya. of no material value, a VTB Bank plastic card of no material value, a SSK discount card of no material value. At the same time, after his arrest, the minor Lesnikov in every possible way denied his involvement in the committed act. However, during the interrogation, Lesnikov made a reservation regarding his location at the time of the theft, which the investigator took advantage of, and during the subsequent interrogation of the persons who provided the suspect’s alibi, skillfully using the information received from the suspect, he established the absence of an alibi [22].

Here, much depends on the investigator’s ability to answer this question correctly and convincingly. A feature of the psyche of minors is increased suggestibility. This can be used to help the interrogated person’s positive emotions prevail over the negative ones, to evoke repentance and a desire to make amends for the harm caused by the crime through sincere behavior. At the same time, the ability to be relatively easily swayed by suggestion on the part of the interrogated becomes a source of self-incrimination if they begin to seek a confession of guilt from a minor in the absence of solid evidence.

When interrogating a minor accused, the investigator, as when interrogating an adult, must avoid any humiliation of his personality. Without sufficient life experience and neglecting the consequences, a minor may deny his guilt contrary to common sense. An appeal to his human dignity usually has the desired effect.

An important place when interrogating a minor is occupied by clarifying his relationship with his accomplices. If a minor accused gives false testimony, then first of all you should find out whether such behavior during interrogation is explained by a feeling of so-called false camaraderie. An example of this is criminal case No. 3\2012 [23] accusing Abramov and Semenov of committing a number of crimes under Article 161 Part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Both participants in the crime were previously convicted of similar crimes. The accused Semyonov took all the blame on himself for the incriminated crimes. When talking with an investigator who had previously led an investigation for which Abramov and Semenov were previously convicted, it was found out that Semenov had previously shielded Abramov. After this conversation, taking into account the information received, the interrogation was structured in such a way that, as a result, the accused Semenov had to give testimony incriminating Abramov of the crime committed.

The investigator explained that he knew that Semenov was “covering up” for Abramov out of a sense of false camaraderie and thereby aggravating his situation, dooming himself to bear responsibility for actions that he did not commit.

In this case, the investigator should convince the minor of the fallacy and harmfulness of such ideas about partnership, explain that truthful testimony, first of all, will help establish the true role of each of the accomplices. Often, a minor’s lies are explained by fear of retaliation from accomplices. If by this time the investigator has evidence of the guilt of the accomplices, then it is advisable to explain to the interrogated that his testimony does not play a decisive role in exposing them, and to support this with some evidence. In cases of minors, it is necessary to take into account the possibility of self-incrimination or collusion, when a minor accused tries to shield his accomplices or downplay their role. Testimony of this kind should be compared with other materials of the case immediately during the interrogation and the attention of the interrogated should be drawn to the contradictions.

During the investigation of criminal case No. 02/2010 [24] on charges of Grishaev, Lebedev and Timakov of committing crimes under Article 158 Part 2, 161 Part 2 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation, as a result of interrogations, minors Grishaev and Timakov, shielding Lebedev, gave false testimony. Having compared the materials of the criminal case - protocols of inspection of the scene of the incident, the protocol of interrogation of the victim Dmitrieva about the volume of stolen property, as well as the external physical data of the teenagers, it was established that Grishaev and Timakov were not able to commit the theft together. Having presented this evidence to the accused Grishaev and Timakov, during repeated interrogation, the teenagers pointed to the third adult accomplice in the crime - Lebedev.

One of the manifestations of insincerity in the testimony of a minor is self-incrimination. In order to expose self-incrimination, it is advisable to take into account the individual psychological qualities of a minor (volitional qualities, character traits, temperament, tendency to suggestibility).

Thus, in criminal case No. 6/2011, minor Korov stated during interrogation that he himself decided to steal from a store, but because... couldn’t unlock the doors, he asked his twenty-year-old brother to help him

[25]
. At the same time, he spoke in sufficient detail about how he committed the crime, but during the repeated interrogation, all the testimony was voiced by him word for word, as if the text had been memorized
.

The most effective way to suppress lies is to interrogate them in detail about the events and their actions at the time the crime was committed, the time and signs of the crime, and comparison of the data obtained with other materials of the criminal case. When asking questions, it is important for the investigator to make sure that the interrogated person correctly understands their content. For this purpose, you can use the method of control questions. If the minor does not understand the content of the question, it is advisable to divide the latter into several more specific and simple ones.

A preliminary interrogation of his parents or persons replacing them, as well as teachers, can contribute to a more effective interrogation of a minor suspect in cases of theft. This will allow the investigator to obtain useful information about the personality of the interrogated minor who committed the theft, about the conditions of his life and upbringing for the subsequent establishment of communicative and psychological contact with him and the assessment of his testimony.

From the above, we can draw conclusions: the testimony of a minor suspect in cases of theft, due to its possible incompleteness, inaccuracy and variability, should always be especially carefully checked; obtaining these readings requires special knowledge in the field of psychology, as well as great patience and tact. Therefore, to conduct a preliminary investigation in a case involving a minor suspect, well-trained investigators, as well as experienced teachers and psychologists, should be involved.

Cost of a lawyer for defense under Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation

How much will a lawyer cost for defense under Art. 158 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation depends, first of all, on what kind of lawyer he is, who works as intended, i.e. invited by the investigator or the court, or it is a lawyer with whom an agreement has been concluded. The agreement will specify the amount of the fee.

Also, the cost of a lawyer’s services depends on the number of investigative actions and the number of court hearings.

The lawyer is paid for both participation in the investigation and for participation in court separately:

• The cost of our lawyers’ services at the preliminary investigation stage is 10,000 rubles.
• For participation in court in the first instance, the cost of services is 10,000 rubles.
• Defense in court in the second instance will cost 15,000 rubles.
• For performing individual actions, such as familiarizing yourself with the case, drawing up complaints and other documents, as well as performing other actions, the cost of each action will be from 3,000 rubles. up to 5,000 rub.

More detailed information about the prices of our law office can be found on our website, and you can also find out more information when visiting our office in person.

What liability awaits a witness for refusing to testify?

The Tax Code of the Russian Federation provides for the liability of a witness for failure to appear, or evasion of appearing without good reason, in the form of a fine in the amount of 1,000 rubles, and for unlawful refusal to testify, as well as giving knowingly false testimony in the amount of 3,000 rubles.

There is no criminal or administrative liability for failure to appear and giving knowingly false testimony during interrogation as a tax control exercise, although the standard form of the interrogation protocol warns to the contrary.

However, if, along with a tax audit, a criminal case is initiated, then criminal liability is already provided for in Art. 307, 308 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Help from a theft lawyer in Yekaterinburg

• We get involved in the case at any stage , be it a summons for questioning, a preliminary investigation, or a direct hearing of the case in court or already in the process of appealing a verdict in a criminal case
• A theft lawyer will help you obtain evidence from the competent authorities confirming the absence of guilt, collect positive characteristics and characteristic material aimed at accumulating exculpatory points.
• We will make every effort to reconcile the parties before criminal proceedings take effect, if possible.
• If you admit your guilt, the lawyer’s work will be aimed at reclassifying you to a less serious charge or mitigating the punishment. For example, without causing significant damage, the sanction is much lower, and therefore the chances of success in the form of a suspended sentence are much higher.
• If you do not admit guilt, your lawyer will help you prove your case by all legal means and get the criminal prosecution against you terminated, including with the help of a legal investigation, which will be carried out if necessary.

The theft lawyer’s defense will be based on objections to the prosecutor’s charges, since they often do not correspond to the stated amount or the actual circumstances of the case. A competent appeal of the verdict, if necessary, also leads to a positive result. In addition, you will not have a criminal record, which negatively affects your free life. We have repeatedly taken on this category of cases and achieved the most lenient punishment.