Nowe metody identyfikacji w praktyce sądowej.
The paper deals with a topic of new invented methods of identification which gradually might become so called scientific evidence. After a short historical review containing some facts concerning implementing to criminal procedure opinions of expert witnesses of forensic medicine, fingerprinting and DNA examination there has been presented A merican standards of admissibility of scientific (as well as non-scientific) evidence: Frye, Daubert and Kumho. Although they have arisen in the system of common law, there is no reason to underestimate their significance in the countries of civil law. A short analyze of German’s, Holland’s as well as Polish jurisprudence shows undoubtedly, the courts need some criteria to decide whether the new method used by the expert witness is admissible/non-admissible and reliable and if so, then how. There can be hovewer distinguished at least three groups of legal systems - the ’conservative’ (the new methods are actually unadmissible; some civil law countries), the ’liberal’ (which admits new methods, sometimes under certain conditions; mainly common law countries) and the ’dumb’ one (there is neither legal regulation nor jurisprudence concerning the topic; the other part of civil law countries). The main part of the paper has been devoted to an analyze of Polish jurisprudence trying to create a commonly accepted definition of scientific evidence which could be adopted into practice. For last 10 years there have been two attempts of that by the occasion of implementing osmology/odorology/dog-scent-identification as well as the DNA examination. The last one seems to be particularly worth emphasizing. The Polish Supreme Court has established conditions of acceptance a new method which read as follows: 1) the method has to be practised in an distinguished, attested laboratory or in the one of the university’s chair; 2) the method should be based on a scientific theory and until it is eventually confirmed, the concrete examination has to be always repeated by an independent lab; 3) results should be - if possible - given in figures.
- Straipsniai / Articles