Home Blanks for the winter The communicative activity of the investigator is focused on providing psychological. Psychology of the communicative activity of the investigator. Chapter 2. Psychology of the communicative activity of the investigator

Blanks for the winter

The communicative activity of the investigator is focused on providing psychological. Psychology of the communicative activity of the investigator. Chapter 2. Psychology of the communicative activity of the investigator

The activities of the investigator are connected with his direct interaction with the participants in the criminal process. Possible opposition of interested persons requires the investigator to implement certain behavioral strategies, reflective control of the behavior of opposing persons, and the use of psychologized tactical techniques.
Information processes are the base of actions here as well. However, if at the stage of searching for a criminal information is materially extracted from the circumstances of the crime, then when interacting with persons undergoing the case, information processes are determined by the mental states of these persons, their position in relation to justice and attitude towards this investigator.
The investigator will have to adequately reflect the positions and real awareness of persons and create psychological prerequisites for information communication.
In this case, the following situations may arise:
the interrogated person possesses the required information, but hides it;
the interrogated person has the necessary information, but deliberately distorts it;
the interrogated person conveys certain information in good faith, but the information is not adequate to reality (due to distortions of perception and personal reconstruction of the material in the subject's memory);
the interrogated person does not have the required information.
For the purpose of an objective, complete and comprehensive investigation, obtaining adequate information about the event being investigated, the investigator must carry out effective communication activities.
When starting an investigation, the investigator in a number of cases encounters communicative uncertainty.
Here the investigator makes an assumption about the most probable actions of the opposing side. The optimality of investigative decisions depends on the level of reflectivity of the investigator.
Imitating the position of the opposing party, the possible reasoning of the accused, suspect or unscrupulous witness trying to mislead the investigation, the investigator reflexively controls their actions.
The mental state of persons involved in the case is determined by their position in relation to the investigation, the legal status of the person (whether he is an accused, suspect, victim or witness), their individual psychological characteristics.

Chapter V. Fundamentals of the Psychology of Investigative Activity

Chapter 2. Psychology of the communicative activity of the investigator

The success of the investigation is largely determined by the interaction of the investigator with the persons involved in the case - the suspect, the accused, the victim, the witness, etc.

Interpersonal communication is an integral part of the investigator's activities - his communication activities .

At all stages of the investigation, the psychic interaction of the investigator with other participants in the criminal process is carried out. The basis of such interaction is formed by informational and intentional (selectively directed) processes. Each of the parties is a source and recipient of information, on the basis of which the parties evaluate each other, develop an appropriate strategy and tactics of behavior ... In this case, a wide variety of information is used - the meaning and meaning of speech messages, speech intonation, gestures, facial expressions, pantomime (posture), appearance, emotional-situational reactions, certain psychological phenomena of interpersonal perception arise:

identification- understanding and interpretation of the perceived person through identification with him;

socio-psychological reflection- interpretation of the perceived person through thinking for him;

empathy- understanding of the perceived person through emotional feeling, empathy for his states;

stereotyping- assessment of a perceived person by means of spreading to him the qualities inherent in a particular social group.

Interpersonal communication during the investigation is characterized, as a rule, by increased self-control of communicating persons, a certain mental tension, in some cases by an increased level of anxiety, and active reflective activity. The behavior of each of the parties is constantly being corrected based on feedback, and their mental states change.

The mental states of the investigator and persons passing through the case during their interaction are determined by a number of factors.

The mental state of the investigator due to his social and role status, personal and professional qualities, informational armament in this criminal case, confidence in the ways to achieve goals, situational influences. ... The general background state of the investigator during his interaction with persons under investigation is an increased level of mental activity.

The mental state of witnesses, victims, suspects, accused is determined to a large extent by the attitude to justice, to the perfect act, possible punishment, awareness of the forced necessity of communication. The general background mental state of these individuals is mental tension.

Mental states are largely determined by the legal status of a person, that is, whether he is an accused, a suspect, a victim or a witness.

Features of the mental state of the accused and the suspect are largely determined by their relationship to the event of the crime and to justice. In this case, social and value personal positions, as well as reflection by the suspect (accused) of the degree of proof of the crime, the state of its investigation, are of significant importance. Depending on these circumstances, two different strategies of behavior may arise, associated either with the desire to avoid trial and fair punishment, or with the awareness of the inevitability of the trial (and even its necessity - in the case of deep remorse).

The first of these behavioral strategies leads to the development of appropriate defensive tactics, to the formation in the mind of the suspect (accused) of the so-called defensive dominant. These defensive tactics can be active (giving false testimony, destroying evidence, creating false evidence, influencing witnesses) and passive (refusing to cooperate with the investigator without active opposition).

The defensive dominant of persons opposing the investigation (they can be, in addition to the accused and the suspect, witnesses, victims) is the main mental phenomenon, the orientation in which is especially important for the tactics of the investigation.

The protective mechanisms of possible counteraction to the investigator begin to form already when a criminal intent arises, and then in the course of the commission of a crime and when its traces are hidden. An experienced criminal does everything possible, in his opinion, to hide the traces of a crime, to make the investigation extremely difficult, to mislead the investigation. At the same time, a line of conduct is planned for the case of disclosure of a crime.

However, the weakness of the defensive dominant lies precisely in the fact that it determines the direction of the mental activity of the accused, heightened sensitivity to everything that is guarded by the established defensive positions.

Every word of the investigator, his actions are involuntarily extrapolated by the accused to the entire system of what is protected by a protective dominant. At the same time, there is a tendency to exaggerate the informational armament of the investigator, to overestimate the impacts that threaten the protective dominant.

The psychology of interaction between an investigator and a suspect (accused) is also determined by those general characterological features that are inherent in persons who commit certain types of crimes. The investigator must take into account that, for example, violent criminals, as a rule, are distinguished by extreme selfishness, primitive anarchic aspirations, emotional and moral asyntony, cruelty and aggressiveness. The behavior of criminals in these cases is characterized by thoughtlessness, impulsiveness, a desire for momentary satisfaction of narrowly utilitarian excitements, uncritical behavior in general, and it is conditioned by rigid setting mechanisms.

When communicating with this category of persons under investigation, one should anticipate possible emotional outbursts, situational conflicts.Along with this, the reduced criticality of their behavior makes it impossible for a long-term, methodically and tactically thought-out counteraction to the investigator.

Thus, a tougher position is needed in relation to persons accused of premeditated murder, systematically drunken, extremely cruel and cynical.

When interacting with so-called accidental killers, the investigator must take into account unfavorable everyday circumstances. Without a comprehensive consideration of personal factors, he cannot adequately respond to individual behavioral manifestations of these persons.

When interacting with persons prosecuted on charges of rape, it is necessary to take into account the general mental characteristics of such persons - shamelessness, extreme vulgarity, licentiousness, sensuality, conscious immorality.

Certain general psychological characteristics are also inherent in persons accused of mercenary-violent and mercenary crimes. Thus, robberies and robberies are committed, as a rule, by persons with an extreme anti-social and anti-legal orientation. They are characterized by immorality, drunkenness. Along with this, they are distinguished by increased self-control, the ability to sustain tactical countermeasures.

When interacting with individual members of a criminal group, the investigator must take into account and neutralize their false position of “being protected by the group” (“not alone me”).

The mental state of the victim can be largely determined by his accusatory dominant, negative emotions associated with the damage suffered. These conflict states are often associated with the general conflict nature of the individual. Conflicting personality traits can sometimes trigger a crime.

On the other hand, an objective establishment of what the damage caused to the victim's personality is, helps to clarify the social danger of the committed criminal act.

The testimony of the victim is aimed at protecting his interests, but not as an individual, but as a member of society. However, the testimonies of many victims are oversaturated with evaluative elements, while only factual information is of evidential value.

The attitude of the victims to the establishment of the truth is also different. Along with the desire to contribute to the formation of the truth, there may be other motives that explain the behavior of individual victims - from indifference to direct opposition to the investigator.

The investigator obtains significant information necessary for solving a crime from testimony.

When obtaining information from a witness, it is necessary to take into account:

his attitude to the event under investigation and the personality of the accused;

attitude to justice;

mental state upon perception of the event under investigation;

mental state when testifying.

A feature of the behavior of witnesses during the preliminary investigation (and in court) is their procedurally regulated obligation to give evidence necessary for solving a crime.

The investigator must take into account that both the direction of perception and its content are determined by the evaluative position of the perceiving person, the level of his mental, intellectual and moral development.

When the investigator interacts with the witness, a certain line of conduct is also implemented in assessing the reported facts. Therefore, it is important to identify the reasons for the omissions and omissions made by the witness. They can be caused by various motives - fear of revenge, pity, the desire to get rid of the duties of a witness, etc. Along with this, the testimony itself is hampered by a number of psychological circumstances - the fragmentation of the initial perception of events, mnemonic and speech-expressive difficulties.

The interaction of an investigator with witnesses is carried out, as a rule, in the form of cooperation. The atmosphere of cooperation must be specially maintained, emphasizing satisfaction with the success in communication, showing a positive attitude towards a bona fide witness. At the same time, in necessary cases, the investigator provides mnemonic assistance (avoiding any suggestive influences). However, one should beware conformity of behavior of witnesses , willingly answering all the questions of the investigator, mixing the truth with speculation.

There may be issues between the investigator and individual witnesses. pseudo-conflicts ... If genuine conflicts are based on the contradictory goals of the two parties, then pseudo-conflicts occur with a neutral attitude of one party to the other, in the absence of contradictions in their goals. Pseudo-conflicts arise when there is a reluctance to cooperate for reasons not related to the investigation (due to lack of time, lack of understanding of the meaning of cooperation with the investigator, because of a negative attitude towards him due to his low culture of behavior, etc.).

It is very important to identify the causes of the pseudo-conflict in a timely manner. Inappropriate actions of the investigator in such a situation can lead to the escalation of a pseudo-conflict into a genuine conflict, to the formation of a stable negative attitude towards the investigator in the person.

Timely, preventive overcoming of the position of perjury is especially essential. People have great difficulty in changing the initial readings. Psychologically, it is very difficult to recognize the complexity of the previously given indications. One of the psychologically difficult tasks is to overcome the mental passivity of individual witnesses, to activate their mental activity. At the same time, it is very important to overcome secrecy, constraint, isolation, to create conditions for the emergence and developed communicative contacts.

An investigator needs considerable psychological knowledge when interacting with minors. It should take into account both the general age characteristics of minors, adolescents and young men, and the psychological characteristics inherent in juvenile offenders.

Of great importance in investigative practice is preparation of the investigator for communication with persons involved in the case. You should first familiarize yourself with the personal characteristics of each person involved in the case, the characteristics of his behavior, lifestyle, the range of his needs and interests, predicting not only his own actions, but also possible reactions to them.

In preparation for communicating with persons undergoing the case, the investigator forecasts, first of all, their positions regarding the circumstances of the case, significant for the investigation, develops a strategy and tactics for solving investigative problems.

The communication of the investigator with the persons undergoing the case is largely formalized, due to procedural requirements.

Both the investigator and each person involved in the case have a clearly defined legal status.

Interpersonal communication during the preliminary investigation is not an ordinary two-way process, it is unilaterally directed by the imperious initiative of the investigator within the framework of criminal procedural norms.

The formalization inherent in this type of communication greatly complicates, fetters the mental activity of persons undergoing the case and requires from the investigator communicative flexibility, the use of special means of activating communication.

Any formal-role communication has an individual style that ensures its success or failure.

Psychologically, it is especially important for the investigator to enter into communication. , the establishment of primary communicative contacts, which largely determine their further development. Communicative contact is mutual activation of communication with the aim of its further development .

The establishment of communicative contact is due to the mental state of the contacting persons, their mental adaptation to the communication environment and to the personality of the communication partner. The basis for establishing communicative contact is the actualization of an emotionally significant subject of communication, which causes the mental activity of communicating persons.

Establishing communicative contact is not a simple psychological task, it is complicated in the course of the investigation by the negative attitude of individuals towards representatives of justice, anger, aggressiveness, secrecy, and suspicion. However, in this case, as a rule, there is always an increased interest in the behavior of the investigator.

In the position of individual investigators, negative attitudes can also prevail - an extremely negative attitude towards the antisocial personality of the suspect (accused) and the associated arrogance, arrogance, a sense of superiority, etc. The professional quality of an investigator is his ability to neutralize his emotionally negative attitude towards the suspect ( the accused).

When entering into communication, the investigator must determine the mental state of the interrogated, using for this probing communication actions of neutral content ... Two extreme types of mental states can be distinguished here - sharply excited emotionally negative (anger, indignation, etc.) and depressed-depressed (sadness, melancholy, despondency, etc.). Further behavior of the investigator should be based on these conditions.

You should not allow any kind of behavioral acts that aggravate the above negative mental states of the suspect (accused). The investigator can be equally damaged by carelessness, negligence, fussiness, nervousness, accentuated suspicion, as well as feigned gaiety, etc.

The establishment of communicative contact is facilitated by everything that reduces the level of negative mental states.

In most cases, communicative contact is created not on the basis of everyday trifles, but on the basis of information that can cause an optimal focus of excitement. In this case, one should take into account the actualized needs of the communication partner, the current dominants. These dominants are determined not so much by the stable personal or professional interests of the person involved in the case, as by the problems associated with the event under investigation.

Each suspect, accused, victim and witness has their own burning problems, burning questions, centered around the case under investigation. They plan their contacts with the investigator based on their own attitude to the crime event. (And here the usual recommendations of some lawyers are unacceptable, when it is proposed to establish "psychological contact" with a chess lover by talking about the intricacies of the Queen's Gambit,> and with an angler - about the peculiarities of biting in the autumn-winter period.)

When entering into contact with specific persons under investigation, it is necessary to proceed from the fact that “the psychological effect of each external action on the personality is determined by the history of its development”.

The task of the investigator is from the very beginning to rely on the positive social ties of a given person, to strengthen these ties, to awaken citizenship. Therefore, it is best to find in the “history of development” of a given personality significant events related to his self-realization, and start communication based on these events.

The strategy of the investigator's behavior should not be based on flirting with the person being interrogated, looking for any common amateur interests. The persons being interrogated must see the investigator as an honest, principled, cultured person who knows his business, who does not humiliate their personal dignity, does not infringe upon, but protects their rights guaranteed by law.

Establishing a communicative contact is first of all avoiding anything that might violate it: - primitiveness, vulgarity, professional incompetence, and all the more rudeness and mental violence (threats, blackmail, manipulation of false information, infringement of national and religious feelings, etc.). The entire system of communicative contacts should be based on positive manifestations of the personality, on a fair and humane attitude towards the personality of the person under investigation.

The most significant moment for establishing contact is an accessible and convincing explanation of the legal rights and obligations of a given participant in a criminal case.

Suspects (accused) may feel defenseless in the face of impending danger. And the investigator from the very beginning of the investigation must act as a defender of the law, including all, without exception, the rights of the accused, the suspect and other persons involved in the case. It is especially important for the suspects (accused) that the investigator explains certain provisions of the law, discloses the advantages that they can use. The investigator must prove himself not as a persecuting person, but as a person called upon to help another, even a person who has stumbled. And this position should not be ostentatious, but reflect the inner aspirations of the investigator.

The behavior of the suspect (accused) largely depends on the behavior of the investigator. And if the investigator is attentive to the needs of the person dependent on him, he has shown himself as a worthy citizen, they will always want to establish contact with him, to interact.

Persons deprived of their liberty require particular attention. Deprivation of liberty is the strongest psychological factor; limited ability to act, severe moral experiences exacerbate protective dominants, increase a selective attitude towards all actions of officials, rebuild the entire value-motivational and regulatory sphere of the individual, increase sensitivity to individual external influences.

There are no grounds for a negative attitude of the investigator towards the suspect (accused), especially at the beginning of the investigation - the truth has yet to be established. But even the guilty and convicted person remains a citizen of the Soviet state and has certain rights.

Justice must inevitably carry out punishment for the crime committed, but the desire for revenge is alien to it.

Situations of investigative communication in the face of opposition are often called conflict situations ... Conflict as a psychological concept is a clash of oppositely directed, incompatible tendencies in the minds of individual individuals, in the interpersonal relationships of individuals or groups of people, associated with acute negative emotional experiences. Moreover, each conflicting party seeks to harm the other.

The existence of conflicts is possible only if there are conditions for long-term opposition of the parties.

Undoubtedly, there is no general, global conflict between the investigator and the persons under investigation. The task of the investigator is to overcome even temporarily arisen conflict situations and in any case achieve the goal of the investigation - to establish the truth of the event.

Persistent conflicts are possible only when the parties have equal opportunities. The accused and the suspect do not have any means to maintain the conflict for a long time, while the investigator has an arsenal of possibilities to remove it. Therefore, it seems that the recently widespread "theory of conflicts" on preliminary investigation does not have sufficient grounds.

Not all opposition is a conflict, a positional struggle. Counteraction to justice is not a conflict and not a positional struggle, but an untenable trick of a criminal, to overcome which the investigation has a system of scientifically developed means.

Long-term, conflicts, struggle can arise only in the practice of individual low-skilled investigators who do not know the tactics of overcoming opposition to the investigation. Overcoming the counteraction of the person under investigation requires professionalism, mastery of the corresponding basically psychologized techniques. At the same time, mental violence is unacceptable.

The law does not list all possible illegal measures: they are too diverse, but the very basis of all possible illegal measures of influence - harassment of testimony - is prohibited.

The methods of mental violence include prompting and leading questions, threats, unfounded promises, manipulation of false information, the use of base motives, etc. significant contradictions).

Overcoming opposition, the investigator does not set the task of breaking the will of the suspect (accused). He does not fight against him, but carries out a social impact on the asocial personality.

It is necessary to distinguish lawful methods of mental influence .

The effective use of the means and methods of moral mental influence is the basis of the tactical skill of the investigator. Criminal proceedings are based on the measures of influence provided by law in relation to the participants in the criminal case.

Reception of mental influence - this is the impact on the person opposing the investigator by creating such a situation in which the information he is hiding is revealed against his will ... Thus, a tactically targeted system of questions can reveal, in addition to the desire of the interrogated, such facts and details that are known only to the person involved in the crime.

Above, it was noted the need to rely on positive social ties and positive qualities of the person opposing the investigator. Is it permissible, along with this, to use negative mental and moral qualities - emotional instability, irascibility, unscrupulousness, vanity, vindictiveness, etc.? There is no consensus on this issue. From our point of view, it should be answered in the affirmative: a means of achieving the truth is permissible if the person giving evidence remains free in choosing the line of his behavior. At the same time, it is important that the technique used does not contain elements of lies, deception, dishonesty.

Thus, the investigator established that accused P. led an immoral lifestyle, cohabited with several women at the same time, including K. Knowing that P.'s wife was jealous of her husband for this woman, the investigator used this circumstance. Before summoning P.'s wife for a second interrogation (who had previously denied her knowledge of her husband's criminal activities), the investigator laid out the photographs of K. taken from P. on his desk. Seeing them, P.'s wife immediately informed her of the facts that her husband had committed crimes. ...

Did the investigator have a moral right to use such a technique? Did he disclose the intimate aspects of the life of the person under investigation? No, I didn’t disclose it. The photographs of K. could have ended up on his desk for another reason. There was no extortion of testimony from P.'s wife. The procedural rights and legitimate interests of the individual have not been violated

So, faced with stubborn denial, the investigator uses “hard” methods of mental influence, but these methods should not be associated with his preconceived, rigid position. The investigator influences not the content of the testimony, but the motivational sphere of the interrogated person (by explaining the advantages of a truthful confession, the legal value of the available evidence, the use of a special system for their presentation, etc.). At the same time, it is essential to influence the anticipatory (anticipatory) activity of a person who avoids giving truthful testimony.

All techniques based on the effect of “blocking” possible evasions of an interrogated person from giving truthful testimony are legitimate.

Without resorting to misinformation, the investigator can widely use the possibility of a multifaceted interpretation of the information by the interrogated person.

Each method of lawful mental impact has its own "super task" , which is decided by the person under investigation on the basis of the information available to him. Key questions, everything that is most significant for him is important to "submit" at the moment of his greatest mental activity, but from an unexpected side. At the same time, the significance of the information received sharply increases - its emotional generalization occurs.

Even a sequence of questions is psychic. In those cases when they are chronologically associated with true events, there is an impression that the investigator is well aware of them.

But even single, independently significant questions should be comprehensively understood by the investigator as a factor of mental impact. Different editions of the same question can get on different motivational grounds.

Are the methods of mental influence a manifestation of the investigator's prejudiced attitude towards the suspect (accused), who is not considered guilty before the court verdict? This question should be answered in the negative.

In all spheres of human life, especially where tactical interaction takes place - be it diplomacy or a game, military affairs or the investigation of crimes, there is inevitably a mental impact of one side on the other.

What arsenal of means of lawful mental influence on persons opposing the investigation does the investigator have?

familiarization of the opposing person with the system of available evidence, disclosure of their legal value, conviction of the futility of opposition;

explaining the benefits of sincere repentance;

creating in the interrogated person subjective ideas about the amount of evidence, leaving him in the dark about the actually available amount of evidence;

correction of misconceptions about the ignorance of the investigator;

creating conditions for the actions of the person under investigation leading to his exposure;

temporary connivance of tricks, the combination of which can be revealing;

the system of presenting evidence of increasing importance, the sudden presentation of the most important, incriminating evidence;

commission by the investigator of actions that allow their ambiguous interpretation.

The investigator must constantly take into account what information the suspect (accused) has about the course of the investigation, how he rethinks it and what actions he can take in this regard.

Reflexive control of the behavior of the opposing person is based on:

analysis of its general adaptive ways;

its rigidity, stereotyped;

ignorance about the tactical plans of the investigator, about the extent of his awareness;

using surprise, lack of time and information for thoughtful counter-actions.

Usage; lack of time and information from the opposing person should not be interpreted in the spirit of the traditional technique of "taking by surprise." An analysis of practice shows that the answers obtained when “caught by surprise” are rarely associated with an involuntary “giving out” of the truth. In the overwhelming majority of cases, such “suddenness” does not advance the investigator along the path of knowledge of the truth, but very often leads to a breakdown in communicative contact. Along with this, the sudden presentation of compelling incriminating evidence in a situation that contributes to the destruction of the protective dominant of the opposing person should be recognized as an effective method of lawful mental influence.

One of the most effective means of mental influence on a person who is opposing the investigation is to demonstrate the possibilities of objectively establishing the hidden circumstances, regardless of his testimony.

Suppose that, while investigating the case of accepting bribes for the sale of Vyatka washing machines, the investigator established two facts that seller A. had received bribes from V. and S. Having familiarized himself with the procedure for installing these machines, the investigator learned that they require special installation, which is being carried out through the appropriate workshop, the investigator informed A. about the way in which he could identify all the persons to whom A. had sold these machines. After that, A. named five more buyers from whom he received bribes.

Has a great mental impact presentation of evidence and disclosure to the person under investigation of their revealing meaning, forensic capabilities ... At the same time, the environment for the presentation of material evidence, psychological preparation for their adequate perception by those under investigation are essential.

The investigator takes into account and emotional reactions to those material evidence that is significant only in the system of a given event being investigated and are neutral in themselves. Thus, the presentation of the shoes and clothes of the murdered person is emotionally significant for the guilty person and neutral for the innocent person. However, the role of emotional responses in an investigation should not be overstated. They can arise for various reasons.

At the same time, involuntary emotional reactions, their external severity are assessed by the person under investigation himself, which determines his further behavior. In some cases, he may interpret his emotional manifestations as "failure", as giving away a "secret." And if this is followed by a frank confession, it means that the tactical technique of emotional impact turned out to be effective.

One of the means of lawful mental influence is setting before the person under investigation mental tasks related to the logic of the event being investigated .

The increased mental activity of the suspect (accused) in the case of involvement in a crime can be explained by his awareness of the data that are not yet known to the investigator, acute re-experiencing of individual episodes of the crime. So, when inspecting the store from which the theft was committed, the investigator found a woolen blanket on the floor under the window. There were several dents on the blanket, the nature of which suggested that several attempts had been made to hang it on a nail driven into the upper part of the window frame. The need to hang the window arose due to the fact that the street lamp well illuminated the interior of the store.

Suspicion of theft fell on P. During the interrogation, he was asked only one question “for reflection”: “Do you think that the criminal who tried to curtain the window in the store was visible to passers-by?” Keeping in mind that the blanket had repeatedly fallen down and had to be hung again against the background of a brightly lit window, P. decided that someone from his acquaintances had seen and identified him. Considering himself exposed, he confessed to the theft.

Many methods of influence are associated with the phenomenon of "image" - the formation of a certain "image of the investigator" and "the way of his actions" in the mind of the opposing person. The investigator must reflect on the reactions of the person under investigation in relation to his actions and the evidence presented, eliminate everything that can lead to at least a temporary success of opposition, to strengthen the attitude of denial, refrain from interacting with the person under investigation in tactically disadvantageous situations. In tactically most favorable situations, the investigator enhances the impact by synchronizing his actions, using the psychic effect of "accumulation of feelings"

All of the above tactics of mentally coercive influence are not methods of mental violence, since they allow the freedom of expression of the will of the person under investigation, the variability of his behavior.

So, the chain of mental influence is to overcome the attitude of counteraction, to convince the opposing person of the need to give truthful testimony.

The essence of mental influence in legal proceedings is not in stirring up fear and not in seducing the person under investigation with unfounded promises, but in convincing him by effective means of the advantages of dignified, honest behavior. At the same time, the tactics of the investigator are not “traps” or “tricks”.

Techniques of lawful mental influence create psychological conditions that facilitate the opposing person's transition from lies to truth .

The investigator must find out the true motives of denial, flexibly overcome the prevailing negative position of the opposing person, convince him of the inexpediency of the chosen behavioral position, relying on the positive personality traits, and strengthen them in every possible way. The humiliation of the personality, the advancement of only its negative qualities to the foreground leads to personal confrontation, to the withdrawal of the person under investigation from communication that is undesirable for him.

Not to break the will of the person under investigation, but to transform the “evil will” into “good” - this is the psychological super task of the investigator in situations of opposition.

The investigator must suppress everything that can strengthen the negative motives of the opposing person's behavior - communication with other opposing and antisocial persons, receiving information that is undesirable in an investigative and tactical respect

The decisive factor in overcoming opposition is the ability of the investigator to recognize false testimony, the ability to disclose the "strategies" of the suspect or the accused, to convincingly explain the flawedness of their positions. It is also important to clarify the ways of a possible worthy way out of this particular situation.

So, all methods of mental influence on persons undergoing the case must be lawful. The use of any methods of mental violence is illegal.

The investigator must know the clear line between lawful and illegal methods of mental influence. Mental influence is lawful if it does not limit the freedom of expression of the will of the person involved in the case. Anything that limits the freedom of expression of the will of the suspect, the accused, the victim and the witness, “pulls” their testimony in the desired direction of the previously arisen attitudes of the investigator, damages the disclosure of the truth and is illegal.

A tactical technique of mental influence on a person involved in the case is legitimate if none of the three requirements are violated:

the reception is not based on the lack of knowledge of the suspect (accused) or other persons in legal matters;

the reception does not humiliate the dignity of the individual and does not restrict the freedom of her expression of will;

the method does not affect the position of the innocent, does not induce him to admit non-existent guilt, to slander the innocent, to give false testimony.

1. Functional and psychological analysis of investigative activities.

2. Psychological characteristics of information-search investigative actions.

2.1. Factors of the inspection of the scene.

2.2. The psychological essence of presentation for identification.

2.3 Taking into account the psychological factors of the reproduction of the situation and the circumstances of the event.

2.4. Psychological features of the search.

3. Psychological characteristics of information and communication investigative actions.

3.1. Psychological features of interrogation.

3.2. Psychological aspects of face-to-face confrontation.

Crime investigation (investigative activity) is a purposeful process, the purpose of which is to recreate the true picture of a crime event based on its direct and indirect evidence, its psychological structure can be considered as a set of basic (cognitive, constructive, communicative, organizational) and auxiliary (preventive and certifying ) types of activities.

Cognitive activity -search, perception, analysis and generalization of information, with the help of which True knowledge is established in a specific criminal case; constructive activity consists of the taking and composition of the collected evidentiary material (restoration of the crime event by material and ideal traces) and planning the investigation (planning the content of future activities, that is, determining the subject and measures of the investigation, planning the organization of version checking, planning the system and the sequence of one's own actions, planning system and sequence of actions of other participants in the investigation process) communicative activity - the process of establishing and maintaining psychological contact with various categories of participants in the investigation process, as well as the implementation of psychological influence on them in order to obtain the necessary information about the crime event; organizational activity - the implementation of a system of investigative actions to obtain evidence-based information; coordination of efforts of law enforcement officers who are involved in the process of crime investigation; formation of technical and psychological readiness for the departure of the operational-investigative group during certain investigative actions. Preventive activities is to identify the causes and conditions conducive to crime; the implementation of psychological influence on various categories of participants in the investigation in order to correct their undesirable position or behavior; certifying - provision of all received Information in special forms provided for by law (protocol, resolution, etc.).

The characteristics of the psychological characteristics of investigative activity in general coincides with the positions highlighted in the previous section, taking into account the specifics inherent in the process of investigating crimes.

Functional and psychological analysis of investigative activity

The actual situation of a crime is usually determined by a high degree of complexity and uncertainty. Therefore, planning the process of his investigation, the investigator is based not on the real situation, but on its information model. The investigative situation acts as such a model representation - a dynamic information system, reflecting, with varying degrees of adequacy, various logical and historical connections between established and not yet established circumstances, tactical and psychological relations of participants (parties) in criminal proceedings, as well as organizational and managerial structure and level orderliness of the investigation process.

The above defines the typology of the components of the investigative situation:

1) components of an informational nature;

2) components of a procedural and tactical nature;

3) components of a material, organizational and technical nature;

4) components of a psychological nature. The relationship between the components of a real situation and a model representation is rather complex and ambiguous:

An objectively difficult situation is correctly reflected in a difficult investigative situation;

An objectively complex situation is inadequately reflected as a simple investigative situation;

An objectively simple situation is inadequately perceived as a complex investigative situation;

An objectively simple situation is correctly understood as a simple investigative situation.

The indicated ratios are due to possible errors in orientation already at the initial stages of the investigation.

Psychologically, the investigative situation problem situation, which determines the entire cognitive activity of the investigator. The functional center of cognitive activity should be considered solutions to various mental tasks, which are divided into two main types: ideal and real.

Ideal problems are investigative versions put forward after collecting the initial Information and constitute multilevel models. An ideal mental task, as a partial version, aimed at organizing specific information retrieval actions.

When investigating a crime, an investigator solves several types of real problems:

1) the task of identifying sources of information;

2) the tasks of organizing investigative and operational-search actions;

3) tasks for the coordination of activities;

4) the tasks of economizing procedural forces and determining the timing of the investigation;

5) tasks for the organization of preventive measures. First type tasks determines the actions to find NOT so many

the information itself, how reliable its sources are. The initial condition of this type of tasks is contained in a problematic investigative situation as a source of initial information at least of the fact of a crime (city of events, witnesses, victims, material evidence). Detailing the thinking activity of the investigator at this stage is possible for several reasons. First, uncertainty in the absence of initial information can produce many mutually contradictory versions or not productive. Secondly, the selection of semantic information zones is hampered by a significant amount of redundant Information. This, in turn, leads to the advancement of several single-order versions. External consistent consistency of facts, conditions and circumstances (perhaps they do not relate to the fact of a crime) through its obviousness leads the investigator to verification in the wrong direction.

Second type tasks are divided into several subtypes: a) tasks for the selection of an effective investigative action or operational-search measures to obtain evidentiary information; b) tasks for the system of investigative actions and operational-search measures; c) tasks on the structure of the organization of investigative actions and operational-search measures (their planning and implementation).

Third type tasks aimed at coordinating actions in the investigation of crimes. Coordination as a coordinated system of actions aimed at achieving a goal in investigative activities is associated with the concentration of individual actions and their interdependence. In addition, it brings together the efforts of several individuals or departments. Coordination also determines the interpersonal and role interaction of employees taking part in the investigation of a crime, and at least three forms of such interaction can be distinguished: a) ordering the bodies of inquiry to carry out operational-rooting actions; b) ordering the bodies of inquiry to carry out investigative actions; c) assistance to the bodies of inquiry in the work of the investigator in the performance of certain investigative actions.

Fourth the type of tasks involves the economization of procedural efforts and the determination of the timing of activities. The investigator was provided with certain procedural means of finding, fixing and examining evidence, procedural compulsion, etc. At the same time, rather stringent requirements are put forward for the timing of both the entire investigation and individual investigative actions.

In the process of solving any type of problem, the investigator implements the following set of functions:

1) target-finding facts, putting forward versions, etc.;

2) providing - creating conditions for effective action;

3) control-correlations, verification of the results obtained, the solution of the investigator of the problem.

In the process of investigating a crime, the integral personality of the investigator is involved with its inherent structural components, namely:

The level of moral qualities, principles and values;

The level of intellectual and cognitive qualities;

Characterological properties;

Psychophysiological qualities.

The investigator's professiogram, therefore, is a multilevel hierarchical structure that reflects psychodynamic and individual psychological properties and qualities that are realized in professional activity. They are accompanied and colored by certain mental states that affect the dynamics and effectiveness of achieving the final result. Such states are differentiated depending on: a) the role of the individual and the situation - personal and situational; b) the dominant components of activity - intellectual, emotional, volitional; c) severity - deep and superficial; d) the duration of the course - short-term and long-term; e) effects on the personality - positive and negative, sthenic and asthenic; f) the degree of adequacy - adequate and inadequate, etc.

So, the following states optimize the activity:

1) professional interest, a state of creativity, inspiration - causes energy, increases efficiency, improves perception and thought processes;

2) the state of readiness to carry out a certain investigative action - promotes the activation of cognitive processes and observation, the acuteness of sensations, a high level of self-regulation;

3) a state of determination - encourages complex volitional efforts and self-control.

Negatively affect the efficiency of activities:

1) mental tension - disorganizes behavior, causes difficulty in thinking, leads to passivity;

2) anxiety - caused by a difficult situation or unexpected changes, failures and mistakes;

3) frustration - arises in a situation of actual or potential confrontation, of course ends in aggression (against the object or oneself);

4) perseveration - rigidity. A combination of inertia, stereotypicality with persistence, resistance to change as a result of stereotyped thinking and over-typing of investigated cases.

The influence of negative emotional states can be minimized by rational organization and the development of an individual style of activity, in which the shortcomings are compensated by the development of professionally important personality traits and the assimilation of effective methods and means. An analysis of the existing individual styles of activity makes it possible to distinguish the following types of the investigator's personality:

Type 1 - organizer investigator. Skillfully distributes powers, easily establishes interpersonal contacts, successfully manages the actions of the investigative-operational group;

Type 2 - investigator-thinker. He is not inclined to leadership, generates versions productively, is a professional in assessing information on a case, prefers independent, intellectually rich work, has developed productive thinking and imagination;

Type 3 - investigator-communicator. Easily establishes and maintains social contacts, in the course of the investigation he focuses on communicative investigative actions (interrogation, face-to-face confrontation);

Type 4 - Investigator-Pathfinder. The structure of professional qualities is dominated by information retrieval, in particular, a high level of observation. He is inclined to work "hot on the trail", has broad knowledge of forensics.

The functional and psychological structure of investigative activities is represented by information retrieval and information and communication investigative actions.

Information retrieval - these are actions based on information search and operation of information about the events of a crime (inspection of the scene, identification, reproduction of the situation and circumstances of the event, search) information and communication - a group of investigative actions based on communicative activity, that is, they are carried out in conditions of constant contact and dialogue between the participants in the investigation process (interrogation, confrontation).

The success of an investigation is largely determined by the interaction of the investigator with the persons involved in the case, the suspect, the accused, the victim, the witness, etc.

Interpersonal communication is an integral part of the investigator's activity - his communicative activity.

At all stages of the investigation, the psychic interaction of the investigator with other participants in the criminal process is carried out. The basis of such interaction is formed by informational and intentional (selectively directed) processes. Each of the parties is a source and recipient of information, on the basis of which the parties evaluate each other, develop an appropriate strategy and tactics of behavior. In this case, a wide variety of information is used: the meaning and meaning of speech messages, speech intonation, gestures, facial expressions, pantomime (posture), appearance, emotional-situational reactions, certain psychological phenomena of interpersonal perception arise:

identification - understanding and interpretation of the perceived person through identification with him;

socio-psychological reflection - the interpretation of a perceived person through thinking about him;

empathy - understanding the perceived person through emotional feeling, empathy for his states;

stereotyping is an assessment of a perceived person by spreading to him the qualities inherent in a particular social group.

Interpersonal communication during an investigation is characterized, as a rule, by an increased self-control of communicating persons, a certain mental tension, in some cases an increased level of anxiety, and active reflective activity. The behavior of each of the parties is constantly being corrected based on feedback, and their mental states change.

The mental states of the investigator and persons passing through the case during their interaction are determined by a number of factors.

The mental state of the investigator is determined by his social and role status, personal and professional qualities, informational equipment in this criminal case, confidence in the ways to achieve goals, situational influences. The general background state of the investigator during his interaction with persons under investigation is an increased level of mental activity.

The mental state of witnesses, victims, suspects, accused is determined to a large extent by the attitude towards justice, towards the perfect act, possible punishment, and the awareness of the compulsory need for communication. The general background mental state of these individuals is mental tension.

Mental states are largely determined by the legal status of a person, that is, whether he is an accused, a suspect, a victim or a witness.

The peculiarities of the mental state of the accused and the suspect are largely determined by their attitude to the crime event and to justice. In this case, social and value personal positions, as well as reflection by the suspect (accused) of the degree of proof of the crime, the state of its investigation, are of significant importance. Depending on these circumstances, two different strategies of behavior may arise, associated either with the desire to avoid trial and fair punishment, or with the awareness of the inevitability of the trial (and even its necessity - in the case of deep remorse).

The first of these behavioral strategies leads to the development of appropriate defensive tactics, to the formation in the mind of the suspect (accused) of the so-called "defensive dominant". These defensive tactics can be active (giving false testimony, destroying evidence, creating false evidence, influencing witnesses) and passive (refusing to cooperate with the investigator without active opposition).

Protective dominant of persons opposing the investigation (they can be, in addition to the accused and the suspect, witnesses,

victims) is the main mental phenomenon, the orientation in which is especially important for the tactics of the investigation.

The psychology of interaction between an investigator and a suspect (accused) is also determined by those general characterological features that are inherent in persons who commit certain types of crimes. The investigator must take into account that, for example, violent criminals, as a rule, are distinguished by extreme egoism, primitive anarchic aspirations, emotional and moral asyntony, cruelty and aggressiveness. The behavior of criminals in these cases is characterized by thoughtlessness, impulsiveness, striving for momentary satisfaction of narrowly utilitarian motives, uncritical behavior in general, and its conditioning by rigid setting mechanisms.

When dealing with this category of persons under investigation, one should anticipate possible affective outbursts, situational conflicts. Along with this, the reduced criticality of their behavior makes it impossible for a long-term, methodically and tactically thought-out counteraction to the investigator.

One of the essential factors guiding the investigator's tactics is the earliest possible identification of the motive for the act committed by the person concerned. Motives of behavior serve as an indicator of the general orientation of the personality, a manifestation of its basic values. Thus, a tougher position is needed in relation to persons accused of premeditated murder, systematically drunken, extremely cruel and cynical.

When interacting with so-called "accidental" murderers, the investigator must take into account adverse everyday circumstances. Without a comprehensive consideration of personal factors, he cannot adequately respond to individual behavioral manifestations of these persons.

When interacting with persons involved in a criminal

responsibility on charges of rape, it is necessary to take into account the general mental characteristics of such persons: shamelessness, extreme vulgarity, licentiousness, sensuality, conscious immorality.

When interacting with individual members of a criminal group, the investigator must take into account and neutralize their false position of "protected by the group" ("not alone me").

The mental state of the victim can be largely determined by his "accusatory dominant", negative emotions associated with the damage suffered. These conflict states are often associated with the general conflict nature of the individual. Conflicting personality traits can sometimes trigger a crime.

On the other hand, an objective establishment of what the damage caused to the victim's personality is, helps to clarify the social danger of the committed criminal act.

The attitude of the victims to the establishment of the truth is also different. Along with the desire to facilitate the establishment of the truth, there may be other motives that explain the behavior of individual victims - from indifference to direct opposition to the investigator.

The investigator obtains significant information necessary for solving a crime from testimony.

When obtaining information from a witness, it is necessary to take into account:

his attitude to the event under investigation and the personality of the accused;

attitude to justice;

mental state upon perception of the event under investigation;

mental state when testifying.

A feature of the behavior of witnesses during the preliminary investigation (and in court) is their procedurally regulated obligation to give evidence necessary for solving a crime.

omissions. They can be caused by various motives: fear of revenge, pity, the desire to get rid of the duties of the witness, etc. Along with this, the testimony itself is complicated by a number of psychological circumstances: the fragmentation of the initial perception of events, mnemonic and speech-expressive difficulties.

The interaction of an investigator with witnesses is carried out, as a rule, in the form of cooperation. The atmosphere of cooperation must be specially maintained, emphasizing satisfaction with the success in communication, showing a positive attitude towards a bona fide witness. At the same time, in necessary cases, the investigator provides mnemonic assistance (avoiding any suggestive influences). However, one should beware of the conformity of the behavior of witnesses who readily answer all the questions of the investigator, confusing the truth with speculation.

Pseudo-conflicts can arise between the investigator and individual witnesses. If genuine conflicts are based on the contradictory goals of the two parties, then pseudo-conflicts occur with a neutral attitude of one party to the other in the absence of contradictions in their goals. Pseudo-conflicts arise when there is a reluctance to cooperate for reasons that have nothing to do with the investigation (due to lack of time, lack of understanding of the meaning of cooperation with the investigator, because of a negative attitude towards him due to his low culture of behavior, etc.).

One of the psychologically difficult tasks is to overcome the mental passivity of individual witnesses, to activate their mental activity. At the same time, it is very important to overcome secrecy, constraint, isolation, to create conditions for the emergence and development of communicative contacts.

Of great importance in investigative practice is the preparation of the investigator to communicate with persons undergoing the case. You should first familiarize yourself with the personal characteristics of each

the person passing through the case, the peculiarities of his behavior, lifestyle, the range of his needs and interests, predicting not only his own actions, but also possible reactions to them.

The communication of the investigator with the persons undergoing the case is largely formalized, due to procedural requirements.

Both the investigator and each person involved in the case have a clearly defined legal status.

Any formal-role communication has an individual style that ensures its success or failure.

Psychologically, it is especially important for the investigator to enter into communication, to establish primary communicative contacts, which largely determine their further development. Communicative contact is mutual activation of communication with the aim of its further development.

In forensic psychological literature, entering into communication with persons under investigation is often referred to as establishing psychological contact. However, the term "psychological contact" means an emotionally positive relationship based on common interests and the unity of goals of the communicating persons. Since have

of participants in a criminal case in legal proceedings there is no constant unity of goals and interests, the term "psychological contact" should be replaced by the term "communicative contact".

The professional quality of an investigator is his ability to neutralize his emotionally negative attitude towards the suspect (accused).

When entering into communication, the investigator must determine the mental state of the interrogated, using for this probing communicative actions of neutral content. Two extreme types of mental states can be distinguished here: sharply excited emotionally negative (anger, indignation, etc.) and depressed-depressed (sadness, melancholy, despondency, etc.). Further behavior of the investigator should be based on these conditions.

The establishment of communicative contact is facilitated by everything that reduces the level of negative mental states.

Each suspect, accused, victim and witness has their own burning problems, burning questions, centered around the case under investigation. They plan their contacts with the investigator based on their own attitude to the crime event. (And here the usual recommendations of some lawyers are unacceptable, when it is proposed to establish "psychological contact" with a chess lover by talking about the intricacies of the Queen's Gambit, and with an angler - about the peculiarities of biting in the autumn-winter period).

When entering into contact with specific persons under investigation, it is necessary to proceed from the fact that "... the psychological effect of every external action is determined by the history of its development ..." 1.

The task of the investigator is from the very beginning to rely on the positive social ties of a given person, to strengthen these ties, to awaken citizenship. Therefore, it is best to find in the "history of development" of a given personality significant events related to his self-realization, and start communication based on these events.

The strategy of the investigator's behavior should not be based on flirting with the person being interrogated, looking for any common amateur interests. The interrogated persons should see the investigator as an honest, principled, cultured person who knows his business, who does not humiliate their personal dignity, does not infringe upon, but protects their rights guaranteed by law.

Establishing communicative contact is, first of all, avoiding everything that can violate it: primitiveness, vulgarity, professional incompetence, and all the more rudeness and mental violence (threat, blackmail, manipulation of false information, infringement of national and religious feelings, etc.). The entire system of communicative contacts should be based on positive manifestations of the personality, on a fair and humane attitude towards the personality of the person under investigation.

The most significant moment for establishing contact is an accessible and convincing explanation of the legal rights and obligations of a given participant in a criminal case.

Suspects (accused) may feel defenseless in the face of impending danger.

And the investigator from the very beginning of the investigation must act as a defender of the law, including all, without exception, the rights of the accused, the suspect and other persons involved in the case. It is especially important for the suspects (accused) that the investigator explains certain provisions of the law, discloses the advantages that they can use. The investigator must prove himself not as a persecuting person, but as a person called upon to help another, even a person who has stumbled. And this position should not be ostentatious, but reflect the inner aspirations of the investigator.

The behavior of the suspect (accused) largely depends on the behavior of the investigator. And if the investigator is attentive to the needs of the person dependent on him, has shown himself as a worthy citizen, they will always want to establish contact with him, to interact.

Situations of investigative communication in conditions of opposition are often called conflict situations2. Conflict as a psychological concept (from Lat. "Conflictus" - collision) is

a clash of oppositely directed, incompatible tendencies in the consciousness of individual individuals, in the interpersonal relationships of individuals or groups of people, associated with acute negative emotional experiences3. Moreover, each conflicting party seeks to harm the other.

The existence of conflicts is possible only if there are conditions for long-term opposition of the parties.

Long-term conflicts, struggle can arise only in the practice of individual low-skilled investigators who do not know the tactics of overcoming opposition to the investigation. Overcoming the counteraction of the person under investigation requires professionalism, mastery of the corresponding basically psychologized techniques. At the same time, mental violence is unacceptable.

The most rude, categorically unacceptable methods of mental violence in legal proceedings are named in Part 3 of Art. 14 Fundamentals of Criminal Law. "It is prohibited to harass the testimony of the accused and other persons involved in the case by violence, threats and other illegal measures." The law does not list all possible illegal measures - they are too diverse, but the very basis of all possible illegal measures of influence - harassment of testimony - is prohibited.

The techniques of mental violence include prompting and leading questions, threats, unfounded promises, manipulation of false information, the use of base motives, etc. Thus, it is categorically unacceptable to carry out investigative actions only for "tactical" purposes (for example, conducting a confrontation in the absence of significant contradictions in the testimony - Article 162 of the RSFSR Code of Criminal Procedure).

Overcoming opposition, the investigator does not set the task of breaking the will of the suspect (accused). He does not fight against him, but carries out a social impact on the asocial personality.

Legal methods of mental influence should be distinguished from the means and methods of unlawful mental violence associated with the harassment of testimony needed by the investigator.

Reception of mental influence is the influence on the person opposing the investigator by creating a situation in which the information hidden by him is revealed against his will. Thus, a tactically targeted system of questions can reveal, in addition to the desire of the interrogated, such facts and details that are known only to the person involved in the crime.

Above, it was noted the need to rely on positive social ties and positive qualities of the person opposing the investigator. Is it permissible, along with this, to use negative mental and moral qualities: emotional instability, irascibility, lack of principle, vanity, vindictiveness, etc.? There are two opposing opinions on this issue in the literature5. From our point of view, it should be answered in the affirmative: a means of achieving the truth is permissible if the person giving evidence remains free in choosing the line of his behavior. At the same time, it is important that the technique used does not contain elements of lies, deception, dishonesty.

So, faced with stubborn denial, the investigator uses harsh methods of mental influence, but these methods should not be associated with his biased, rigid position. Investigator

affects not the content of the testimony, but the motivational sphere of the interrogated person (by explaining the advantages of a truthful confession, the legal significance of the available evidence, the use of a special system of their presentation, etc.). At the same time, it is essential to influence the anticipatory (anticipatory) activity of a person who avoids giving truthful testimony.

All methods based on the effect of blocking possible evasions of the interrogated from giving truthful testimony are legitimate. The investigator, foreseeing the possible directions of evasion, "blocks" them in advance, demonstrating their futility and thereby prompts them to give truthful testimony.

Without resorting to misinformation, the investigator can widely use the possibility of a multifaceted interpretation of the information by the interrogated person.

Each method of lawful mental influence has its own "super task", which is solved by the person under investigation on the basis of the information available to him. Key questions, everything that is most significant for him is important to "submit" at the moment of his greatest mental activity, but from an unexpected side. At the same time, the significance of the information received sharply increases - its emotional generalization occurs.

Even a sequence of questions is psychic. In those cases when they are chronologically associated with true events, there is an impression of a wide awareness of the investigator about them.

What arsenal of means of lawful mental influence on persons opposing the investigation does the investigator have?

familiarization of the opposing person with the system of available evidence, disclosure of their legal value, conviction of the futility of opposition; clarifying the benefits of sincere repentance;

creating in the interrogated person subjective ideas about the amount of evidence, leaving him in the dark about the actually available amount of evidence;

correction of misconceptions about the ignorance of the investigator;

creating conditions for the actions of the person under investigation leading to his exposure; temporary connivance of tricks, the combination of which can be revealing;

the system of presenting evidence of increasing importance, the sudden presentation of the most important, incriminating evidence;

commission by the investigator of actions that allow their ambiguous interpretation.

The investigator must constantly take into account what information the suspect (accused) has about the course of the investigation, how he rethinks it and what actions he can take in this regard.

Reflexive control of the behavior of the opposing person is based on:

analysis of its general adaptive ways;

its rigidity, stereotyped;

ignorance about the tactical plans of the investigator, about the extent of his awareness;

using surprise, lack of time and information for thoughtful counter-actions 7.

The use of the opposing party's lack of time and information should not be interpreted in the spirit of the traditional catch-by-surprise technique. An analysis of practice shows that the answers obtained when "caught by surprise" are rarely associated with an involuntary "giving out" of the truth. In the overwhelming majority of cases, such "suddenness" does not advance the investigator along the path of knowing the truth, but very often leads to a breakdown in communicative contact. Along with this, the sudden presentation of compelling incriminating evidence in a situation that contributes to the destruction of the protective dominant of the opposing person should be recognized as an effective method of lawful mental influence.

Suppose that, while investigating the case of accepting bribes for the sale of Vyatka washing machines, the investigator established two facts that seller A. had received bribes from V. and S.

the order of installation of these machines, the investigator learned that they require special installation, which is carried out through the appropriate workshop. The investigator told A. about how he could identify all the persons to whom A. had sold the cars. After that, A. named five more buyers from whom he received bribes.

A great mental impact is exerted by the presentation of material evidence and the disclosure before the person under investigation of their revealing value, the possibilities of judicial inquiry. At the same time, the environment for the presentation of material evidence, psychological preparation for their adequate perception by those under investigation are essential.

The investigator also takes into account the emotional reactions to those material evidence that are significant only in the system of the given event being investigated and are neutral in themselves. Thus, the presentation of the shoes and clothes of the murdered person is emotionally significant for the guilty person and neutral for the innocent person. However, the role of emotional responses in an investigation should not be overstated. They can arise for various reasons.

At the same time, involuntary emotional reactions, their external severity are assessed by the person under investigation himself, which determines his further behavior. In some cases, he may interpret his emotional manifestations as a "failure", as a betrayal of a "secret." And if this is followed by a frank confession, it means that the tactical technique of emotional impact turned out to be effective.

One of the means of lawful mental influence is the setting before the person under investigation of mental tasks related to the logic of the event being investigated.

So, when inspecting the store from which the theft was committed, the investigator found a woolen blanket on the floor under the window. There were several dents on the blanket, the nature of which suggested that several attempts had been made to hang it on a nail driven into the upper part of the window frame. The need to hang the window arose due to the fact that the street lamp well illuminated the interior of the store.

Suspicion of theft fell on P. During interrogation, he was asked only one question "for reflection": "Do you think that the criminal who tried to curtain the window in the store was visible to passers-by?" Keeping in mind that the blanket had repeatedly fallen down and had to be hung again against the background of a brightly lit window, P. decided that someone from his acquaintances had seen and identified him. Considering himself exposed, he confessed to the theft.

tactically in the most favorable situations, the investigator enhances the impact by synchronizing his actions, using the psychic effect of "accumulation of feelings".

So, the goal of mental influence is to overcome the attitude of counteraction, to convince the opposing person of the need to give truthful testimony.

The essence of mental influence in legal proceedings is not in stirring up fear and not in seducing the person under investigation with unfounded promises, but in convincing him by effective means of the advantages of dignified, honest behavior. At the same time, the investigator's tactics are not "traps" or "tricks."

Techniques of lawful mental influence create psychological conditions that facilitate the opposing person's transition from lie to truth.

Not to break the will of the person under investigation, but to transform the "evil will" into "good" - this is the psychological super task of the investigator in situations of opposition.

The investigator must suppress everything that can strengthen the negative motives of the opposing person's behavior: communicating with other opposing and antisocial persons, receiving information that is undesirable in an investigative and tactical respect.

So, all methods of mental influence on persons undergoing the case must be lawful. The use of any methods of mental violence is illegal.

The investigator must know the clear line between lawful and illegal methods of mental influence. Mental influence is lawful if it does not limit the freedom of expression of the will of the person involved in the case. Anything that limits the freedom of expression of the will of the suspect, accused, victim and witness,

"pulls" their testimony in the desired direction of the previously arisen attitudes of the investigator, damages the disclosure of the truth and is illegal.

A tactical technique of mental influence on a person involved in the case is legitimate if none of the three requirements are violated:

the reception is not based on the lack of knowledge of the suspect (accused) or other persons in legal matters;

the reception does not humiliate the dignity of the individual and does not restrict the freedom of her expression of will;

the method does not affect the position of the innocent, does not induce him to admit non-existent guilt, to slander the innocent, to give false testimony.

ESSAY

on the course "Legal Psychology"

on the topic: "Psychology of the communicative activity of an investigator"

Introduction

1. Communicative activity of the investigator

2. Psychology of the victim and witness

Conclusion

Introduction

From a psychological point of view, it is important that the explanation of the essence of the accusation and their procedural rights of the accused be made in simple, accessible language. All questions put to the accused must be answered and confirmed that he understands the charge brought against him.

A feature of the behavior of witnesses in the preliminary investigation (and in court) is their procedurally regulated obligation to give evidence that is important for the disclosure and investigation of crimes.

When interacting with witnesses, the investigator must take into account that the direction of perception of the event and its content are determined by the evaluative position of the perceiving person, the level of his mental, intellectual and moral development.

The procedurally regulated activities of the investigator are carried out by a system of investigative actions. These include: detention, interrogation, confrontation, investigative examination, search and seizure, examination, presentation of people and objects for identification, investigative experiment, verification of testimony on the spot, obtaining samples for comparative research, etc.

1. Communicative activity of the investigator

Information processes are the base of actions here as well. However, if at the stage of searching for a criminal information is materially extracted from the circumstances of the crime, then when interacting with persons undergoing the case, information processes are determined by the mental states of these persons, their position in relation to justice and attitude towards this investigator.

The investigator will have to adequately reflect the positions and real awareness of persons and create psychological prerequisites for information communication.

In this case, the following situations may arise:

1) the interrogated person has the required information, but hides it;

2) the interrogated person has the necessary information, but deliberately distorts it;

3) the interrogated person in good faith transmits certain information, but the information is not adequate to reality (due to distortions of perception and personal reconstruction of the material in the memory of the subject);

4) the interrogated person does not have the required information.

For the purpose of an objective, complete and comprehensive investigation, obtaining adequate information about the event being investigated, the investigator must carry out effective communication activities.

When starting an investigation, the investigator in a number of cases encounters communicative uncertainty.

Here the investigator makes an assumption about the most probable actions of the opposing side. The optimality of investigative decisions depends on the level of reflectivity of the investigator.

By imitating the position of the opposing party, the possible reasoning of the accused, suspect or unscrupulous witness trying to mislead the investigation, the investigator "reflexively controls their actions.

The mental state of persons under investigation is determined by their position in relation to the investigation, the legal status of the person (whether he is an accused, a suspect, a victim or a witness), and their individual psychological characteristics.

The basis for bringing a person to criminal liability is the availability of sufficient evidence for the charge. In order to bring charges, the investigator must collect evidence that the act took place, that the factual signs that form it correspond to the corpus delicti, that the crime was committed by the person to whom the charge was brought, and that there are no circumstances precluding criminal liability or exempting from it.

The act of bringing an accusation consists of announcing the accusation and explaining to the accused his rights.

Psychologically, it is important that the explanation of the essence of the charge and the procedural rights of the accused be made in simple, accessible language. All questions put to the accused must be answered and confirmed that he understands the charge brought against him.

After the decision is made to bring a person as an accused, the investigator and the accused have a number of procedural rights. The investigator has the right to suppress the attempts of the accused to evade criminal responsibility, to prevent the establishment of the truth in the case, to declare a preventive measure (arrest, recognizance not to leave), to remove the accused from office, to conduct a search, to seize property. Taking into account the behavior of the accused during the investigation and other circumstances, the investigator may decide to change or cancel the preventive measure.

For the successful implementation of the preliminary investigation, it is necessary to be guided by the personal characteristics of the persons involved in the case, and especially the accused and suspect. The investigator must have information about the way of life of the accused, his social connections, circle of acquaintances, living conditions. It is especially important to know the stage factors in the formation of the personality of the accused, essential biographical data. It is necessary to pay attention to the behavioral attitudes and stereotypes of the accused person, his adaptive and communicative capabilities, ways of behavior in conflict situations.

The peculiarities of the mental state of the accused (suspect) are largely determined by his attitude to the crime event and justice. Social-value personal positions, as well as reflection by the accused (suspect) of the degree of proof of the crime, the state of its investigation, are essential.

Depending on these circumstances, two different strategies of behavior may arise, associated either with the desire to avoid trial and fair punishment, or with the awareness of the inevitability of the trial (and even its necessity in case of deep remorse).

The first of these behavioral strategies leads to the development of appropriate defensive tactics, the formation in the mind of the accused (suspect) of the so-called "defensive dominant". This defensive tactic can be active - giving false testimony, destroying physical evidence, creating false evidence, influencing witnesses and passive - refusing to cooperate with the investigator without using active means of counteraction.

The "defensive dominant" of persons opposing the investigation (apart from the accused, the suspect, they can be witnesses and even victims) is the main mental phenomenon, the orientation in which is especially important for the tactics of the investigation.

The protective mechanisms of possible counteraction to the investigator begin to form already when a criminal intent arises, and then in the course of the commission of a crime and when its traces are hidden. An experienced criminal does everything possible, in his opinion, to hide the traces of a crime, to make the investigation extremely difficult, to mislead the investigator, and plans a course of action in the event of a crime being solved.