Communicative activity of the participants of the investigative action. Abstract psychology of the communicative activity of the investigator

ESSAY

on the course "Legal psychology"

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

Introduction

1. Communicative activity of the investigator

2. Psychology of the victim and witness

Conclusion

Introduction

In psychological terms, it is important that the explanation of the essence of the prosecution and the procedural rights of the accused be made in a simple, accessible language. It is necessary to get answers to all the questions put to the accused and get his confirmation that he understands the charge against him.

1. Communicative activity of the 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 conscientiously transmits certain information, but the information is not adequate to reality (due to distortions of perception and personal reconstruction of the material in the subject's memory);

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 under investigation, the investigator must carry out effective communication activities.

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

Here the investigator puts forward 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 positions of the opposing side, the possible arguments of the accused, the suspect or the unscrupulous witness, who are 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 the accused, the suspect, the victim or the witness), their individual psychological characteristics.

The basis for holding a person criminally liable is the presence of sufficient evidence for prosecution. In order to bring charges, the investigator must collect evidence that the act took place, that the actual signs that form it correspond to the elements of the crime, that the crime was committed by the person who is charged, and there are no circumstances excluding criminal liability or exempting from it.

The act of arraignment consists of announcing the charge and explaining to the accused his rights.

In psychological terms, it is important that the explanation of the essence of the charge and the procedural rights of the accused be made in a simple, accessible language. It is necessary to get answers to all the questions put to the accused and get his confirmation that he understands the charge against him.

After a 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 stop the accused's attempts to evade criminal liability, prevent the establishment of the truth in the case, announce a preventive measure (arrest, undertaking not to leave), remove the accused from office, conduct a search, and 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 measure of restraint.

For the successful implementation of the preliminary investigation, it is necessary to navigate the personal characteristics of the persons involved in the case, and especially the accused and the suspect. The investigator needs to have information about the lifestyle of the accused, his social connections, circle of acquaintances, living conditions. It is especially important to know the milestone 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 behaving in conflict situations.

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

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

The first of these strategies of behavior leads to the development of appropriate defensive tactics, the formation of the so-called "defensive dominant" in the mind of the accused (suspect). 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 countermeasures.

The "defensive dominant" of persons opposing the investigation (except for 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.

Protective mechanisms of possible opposition to the investigator begin to form already when a criminal intent arises, and then during the commission of a crime and while hiding its traces. An experienced criminal does everything, in his opinion, possible to hide the traces of the crime, extremely complicate the investigation, mislead the investigator, and plans a line of conduct in the event of a crime being solved.

The defensive dominant of the accused determines the direction of his mental activity, increased sensitivity to everything that is protected by the existing defensive positions. But this is the main weakness of the dominant. Every word of the investigator, his actions are involuntarily correlated by the accused to everything that is protected by the protective dominant. At the same time, there is a tendency to exaggerate the information armament of the investigator, reassessment of threatening influences.

The psychology of the interaction of the investigator with the accused (suspect) 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, rapists, as a rule, are distinguished by extreme egoism, primitive anarchist aspirations, rigidity and aggressiveness. In relations with this category of persons under investigation, possible affective outbursts and situational conflicts should be foreseen. Along with this, the reduced criticality of their behavior makes it impossible for a long, tactically thought-out counteraction to the investigator.

A tough stance is needed against those accused of malicious murder.

Interacting with the so-called "accidental" killers, the investigator must take into account the unfavorable everyday circumstances in their lives. Interacting with persons prosecuted on charges of rape, the investigator must keep in mind such mental characteristics as shamelessness, extreme vulgarity, unbridled sensuality, immorality.

The personality of the accused, as a rule, is contradictory - some of their assessments, acquittal, are directed at themselves, others, accusatory - at those around them.

Criminals avoid admitting their guilt. Murderers, robbers, robbers, rapists, thieves, robbers in their mass do not internally condemn themselves. Their self-assessments are characterized by low self-criticism and inadequacy. Most criminals do not consider themselves to be a typical image of criminals, they take themselves beyond the scope of social responsibility, forming a psychological defense mechanism. In this regard, they become insensitive to information that contradicts their personal attitudes (the mechanism of psychological repression), seek arguments to justify their behavior (the mechanism of self-justifying rationalization), seek all kinds of personally affirming compensation, and hypertrophy personality-positive self-esteem.

A person condemns himself only in those cases when he crosses the boundaries of his own behavioral principles.

The social norms violated by the criminal are personally devalued, therefore, as a rule, he does not have a feeling of guilt. But the criminal, while maintaining the value of his I-image, remains sensitive to his own system of values because of this; those qualities that he appreciates. Conviction of dishonesty may not excite him, and conviction of cowardice, cowardice, betrayal - deeply offend. All these psychological features of the accused must be taken into account in tactical interaction with them.

The statement by the accused of the actual circumstances of the case should be subjected to psychological analysis - it indicates what the accused himself attaches more importance to, what he avoids, what dominates or is inhibited in his mind.

Violent types of criminals, as a rule, are prone to accusatory interpretation of the actions of others. Most criminals exaggerate the provocative nature of the pre-criminal situation, subjectively "strengthen" the circumstances conducive to the crime. It is also necessary to take into account the tendency of the accused to change their positions, adapting their acquittal position as evidence is presented. It is psychologically important to weaken and find weaknesses in their defensive position in every possible way. But in a number of cases it is necessary to go "on the occasion" of the legend of the accused in order to present decisive evidence against the background of a mental contrast, to most effectively unmask the accused.

2. Psychology of the victim and witness

The psychological 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 of the victim's personality. Conflict personality traits can provoke a crime.

On the other hand, an objective study of the damage caused to the victim is a condition for clarifying the social danger of the committed criminal act.

The testimony of the victim is a means of protecting his interests, but these are not only individual interests, but the interests of a person as a member of society.

The testimonies of many victims are oversaturated with evaluative elements, while only factual information is of evidentiary value. The attitude of the victims to the establishment of the truth is also different. Along with the desire to contribute to the establishment of the truth, there may be other motives in the behavior of individual victims - from indifference to direct opposition to the investigation.

When interacting with the victim, the investigator should take into account his negative emotional state resulting from the crime and its consequences.

The mental states of the victim (especially when committing violent acts against him) should be attributed to extreme mental states (stress, affect, frustration), causing significant shifts in his reflective-regulatory sphere.

In conflict situations, the consciousness of the victim narrows, and his adaptive capabilities are limited. Irradiation of excitation leads to generalized (excessively extended) generalizations, shifts in the interaction of signaling systems. The traumatic impact of events leads to an exaggeration of time intervals by the victims (sometimes by 2-3 times). Rough physical influences, being superstrong irritants, cause disturbance of mental activity. However, this does not mean that the victims are only capable of disorienting the investigation. Many actions committed before the crime, in its preparatory stage, are imprinted in their memory. In many cases, the victims remember the signs and actions of the perpetrator.

The investigator must take into account the mental state of the victims. By revisiting what happened, they actively reconstruct past events; fix stable foci of excitation. A complex stable neuro-emotional complex arises, with complex interactions of feelings of shame, resentment, humiliation, revenge, and sometimes aggressiveness. Victims of sexual violence have a feeling of depression, apathy, doom, which is aggravated by ideas of a possible pregnancy and infection with sexually transmitted diseases. Often, the testimony of this category of victims is deliberately distorted in order to conceal unseemly acts.

Many victims are characterized by a state of increased level of anxiety and, as a result, destabilization of personal mental integrity, impaired social adaptation.

Repeated appeal to affective circumstances can cause a tense mental state, an involuntary escape from psycho-traumatic circumstances. All this requires special sensitivity, tact and attentiveness on the part of the investigator.

Often the victims have to participate in numerous interrogations and face-to-face confrontations, repeatedly go to the scene, identify the participants in the crime. Under these conditions, the victims may involuntarily form a mechanism of mental protection from repeated psycho-traumatic influences. Intensive processes of inhibition, their irradiation can make it much more difficult to obtain from the victim the information necessary for the investigation. The desire to leave the sphere of investigation can lead to hasty conformal testimony, agreement with the investigator's proposals. The possible impact on the victim by the accused should also be taken into account.

The investigator needs to sensitively capture the dynamics of the victim's mood. Especially careful psychological analysis should be subjected to the request of the victim to terminate the case, which are often caused by mental pressure from interested parties. As a rule, the victim's mental tension, isolation, formality of speech constructions testify to the transition of the victim from truthful testimony to false. In these situations, the investigator must understand who and how could exert mental pressure on the victim, reproduce the possible course of reasoning of the persons concerned, and show their inconsistency. In necessary cases, the investigator overcomes the negative mental impact on the suspect by interested parties, calling them for interrogation and warning of criminal liability for inciting the victim to give false testimony or forcing them to give false testimony.

Psychology of Witnesses

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.

Interacting with witnesses, the investigator must take into account that the orientation of the perception of the event and its content are determined by the evaluative position of the perceiver, the level of his mental, intellectual and moral development.

When interacting with the investigator, the witness adheres to a certain line of conduct, gives his assessment of the reported facts, is silent about something, and makes omissions. They can be caused by various motives - fear of revenge, pity, the desire to get rid of witness duties, 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 verbal difficulties. (More on the psychology of witnesses will be discussed in the chapter "The Psychology of Interrogation and Confrontation".)

Psychological contact in investigative activities

In investigative practice, it is especially important to prepare the investigator for communication with persons involved in the case. Preliminarily getting acquainted with the personal characteristics of each person involved in the case, the characteristics of his behavior, lifestyle, range of needs and interests, the investigator predicts not only his actions, but also the possible reactions of the communication partner to them, provides for the positions of these persons in relation to the circumstances of the case, significant for investigation, develops a strategy and tactics for resolving investigative tasks.

The communication of the investigator with the accused (suspect), victims and witnesses is largely formalized, due to procedural requirements. Both the investigator and each of these persons clearly define their legal status.

Interpersonal communication in the preliminary investigation is not an ordinary two-way process - it is unilaterally directed by the authoritative initiative of the investigator within the framework of criminal procedure rules. The formality inherent in this type of communication greatly complicates and constrains the mental activity of persons involved in the case and requires the investigator to have 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, the investigator's entry into communication, the establishment of primary communicative contacts, which largely determine their further development, are especially significant.

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

Establishing a communicative contact is a complex psychological task, which is complicated in the preliminary investigation by the negative attitude of individuals towards representatives of justice, weakness, aggressiveness, secrecy, and suspicion.

The position of individual investigators can also be dominated by negative attitudes - an extremely negative attitude towards the antisocial personality of the accused or suspect and the associated arrogance, arrogance, a sense of superiority, etc.

Entering into communication with persons passing on the case in the forensic psychological literature is often called the establishment of psychological contact. However, the term "psychological contact" means an emotionally positive relationship based on the common interests and unity of goals of the communicating persons. Since the participants in a criminal case do not have a permanent unity of goals and interests in legal proceedings, it is advisable to replace the term "psychological contact" with the term "communicative contact", which exempts from the mandatory search for common interests and goals, mutual emotionally positive experiences in the conditions of preliminary investigation.

The professional quality of the investigator is his ability to neutralize, slow down the emotionally negative attitude towards the accused (suspect). When entering into communication with him, the investigator must adequately reflect the mental state of the interrogated person, using probing communicative actions of neutral content.

In this case, two extreme types of the mental state of the interrogated person can be detected - a sharply excited emotionally negative (anger, indignation, etc.), depressively suppressed (sadness, melancholy, despondency, etc.). The further behavior of the investigator should be built taking into account these conditions, so as not to aggravate the negative mental state of these persons. Here carelessness, negligence, fussiness, nervousness, accentuated suspicion, feigned gaiety, etc. can hurt.

Everything that increases the level of mental activity contributes to the establishment of communicative contact. In most cases, a communicative contact in the preliminary investigation is created on the basis of information that can cause an increased orienting reaction. It is necessary to take into account the actualized needs of the communication partner, his current dominants, which are determined not so much by the stable personal or professional interests of the person involved in the case, but by the problems associated with the event under investigation.

The accused, the suspect, the victim and witnesses must see in the investigator an honest, principled, cultured person who knows his business, who does not degrade their dignity, does not infringe, but protects their rights rammed by law.

Establishing communicative contact is, first of all, avoiding everything that can break it. Primitiveness, vulgarity, lack of culture, professional incompetence, and even more so rudeness and mental violence in various forms of manifestation (threat, blackmail, manipulation of false information, infringement of national and religious feelings, etc.) are contraindicated for the investigator.

The entire system of communicative contacts should be built, first of all, on the positive qualities of the individual, justice and humane attitude towards the person under investigation. The most significant moment for establishing contact is an accessible and convincing explanation of the legal rights and obligations of this participant in a criminal case.

Persons under investigation often feel defenseless in the face of imminent danger. And the investigator from the very beginning must act as a defender of the law, the rights of the accused, the suspect and other persons involved in the case. Especially significant for the person under investigation is the explanation by the investigator of certain provisions of the law, the disclosure of those opportunities that the accused (suspect) can use in his position.

The investigator must show himself not as a persecuting person, but as a person called to help another, even a stumbled person. And this should not be ostentatious, but the internal position of the investigator. The behavior of the defendant largely depends on the behavior of the investigator. And if the investigator showed attention to the true needs of a person dependent on him, they will always want to establish contact with him.

Persons deprived of their liberty require especially careful attention. Deprivation of liberty is the strongest psychological factor. The limited possibility of action, difficult moral experiences exacerbate the protective dominant, increase the selective attitude towards all the actions of officials, restructure the entire value-motivational and regulatory sphere of the individual, increase sensitivity to certain most significant influences. Especially significant is the first meeting with the investigator, which must comply not only with legal, but also with moral and psychological standards. First of all, it is necessary to avoid conflict interaction.

For a negative attitude towards the accused and the suspect, the investigator, especially at the beginning of the investigation, there is no reason - the truth has yet to be established. But even the guilty and convicted remains a citizen of the state with all the ensuing rights and social status.

The investigator should not have a negative attitude towards persons under investigation, conflict interaction with them. There is no general, global conflict between the investigator and persons under investigation. The task of the investigator is to overcome even temporarily arising conflict situations and in any case achieve the goal of the investigation - to establish the truth of the event under investigation.

Not every opposition to the investigation is a conflict, a positional struggle. Opposition to justice is most often expressed in the untenable tricks of the criminal, to overcome which the investigation has a system of scientifically developed means. Protracted conflicts and struggle can only arise in the practice of low-skilled investigators who do not know how to overcome the opposition to the investigation.

Overcoming the counteraction of the person under investigation requires professionalism, possession of appropriate lawful psychologized techniques. These methods are clearly different from the methods of mental violence. The law prohibits the solicitation of the testimony of the accused and other persons participating in the case by violence, threats and other illegal measures. The methods of mental violence include prompting and leading questions, threats, unreasonable promises, manipulation of false information, use of base motives, etc. Physical violence against a person is criminally punishable. Investigative actions for "tactical purposes" (for example, a confrontation in the absence of significant contradictions in the testimony) are categorically inadmissible.

Physical coercion should be distinguished from physical violence. It is allowed by law during arrest, detention, compulsory examination and obtaining samples for comparative research.

Overcoming resistance, the investigator does not set the task of breaking the opposing personality, belittling it, winning the fight against it.

From the means and methods of unlawful mental violence associated with obtaining evidence pleasing to the investigator, lawful methods of mental coercion should be distinguished.

The effective use of means and techniques of mental coercion is the basis of the tactical skill of investigators. All criminal proceedings are based on coercive actions provided for by law in relation to the participants in the criminal case. Reception of mental coercion influence on the person opposing the investigator by creating a situation in which the concealment is revealed; and them information against his will. For example, a tactically targeted system of questions can reveal, in addition to the desire of the interrogated person, facts and details that can be known only to the person involved in the commission of the crime.

Above, the need to rely on positive social connections and positive qualities of a person opposing the investigator was noted. Is it permissible, along with this, to use his negative mental and moral qualities - emotional instability, irascibility, unprincipledness, vanity, vindictiveness, etc. We believe that the means of achieving the truth is permissible if the person who testifies remains free in choosing the line of his behavior . This is the criterion for the legitimacy of mental influence.

So, the investigator found that the accused II. led an immoral lifestyle, cohabited simultaneously with several women, including K. Knowing that wife II was jealous of her husband for this woman, the investigator used this circumstance. Before summoning P.'s wife for interrogation (who had previously denied her knowledge of her husband's criminal activities), the investigator laid out on the table photographs of K. seized from P. Seeing them, P.'s wife immediately reported the facts known to her of her husband's crimes.

Did the investigator have a moral right to such a reception? Did he divulge the intimate aspects of the life of the person under investigation? No, he didn't. K.'s photographs could have ended up on his desk for other reasons. There was no extortion of testimony from P.'s wife here. The procedural rights and interests of the individual were not violated.

So, when faced with the stubborn denial of the interrogated, the investigator uses "harsh" methods of mental influence, but they should not be associated with the previous position of the investigator. The investigator does not influence the content of the testimony, but the motivational sphere of the interrogated (by explaining the advantages of the legal significance of the evidence, a special system for presenting it, etc.), while the impact on the anticipated activity of the person who evades correct testimony is essential.

All techniques of mental influence based on the effect of "blocking" possible deviations of the interrogated person from truthful testimony are permissible, when the investigator, anticipating possible deviations, "blocks" them in advance, demonstrates their futility and thereby induces them to tell the truth. Without resorting to misinformation, the investigator can widely use the possibility of a diverse interpretation by the person under investigation of the information available in the case. Each method of legitimate 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 most significant for him, it 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.

The sequence of questions of the investigator has a mental impact. In cases where they are associated with genuine events, there is an impression that the investigator is widely aware of these events. But even single questions that have independent significance must be comprehensively comprehended by the investigator as a factor of mental influence. Different wordings of the same essentially the same question may fall on different motivational grounds of the person under investigation.

Defendant A. admitted his participation in the group armed attack on Sberbank and testified that B. participated in the commission of the crime, who denied this and demanded a confrontation with A. Will A. at the confrontation talk with B. as with one of the gang members ? The investigator did not have such confidence. The resolution of the situation depends on the psychological flexibility of the investigator. In this case, the investigator at the confrontation avoided the question: “Who participated in the attack on Sberbank?”, Substituting another: “What were you and B. armed with during the attack on the Savings Bank?”

All tactics have a psychic effect, but they must not be violent. Purpose of mental influence. - overcoming attitudes towards resistance, convincing the opposing person of the need for truthful behavior.

The essence of mental influence in legal proceedings is not to instill fear and not to seduce the person under investigation with unfounded promises, but to convince him by effective means of the advantages of worthy, honest behavior.

Techniques of legitimate mental influence create psychological conditions that make it easier to counteract that person's transition from lies to truth. To do this, it is necessary to know the true motives of denial, to overcome the current negative position of the individual, to convince her of the inappropriateness of the chosen behavior. In this case, the investigator affects the positive qualities of the individual. The humiliation of the individual, bringing to the fore its negative qualities leads to personal confrontation, the individual's withdrawal from undesirable communication.

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

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

The investigator needs to know a clear line between lawful and unlawful methods of investigation: mental influence is lawful, if it does not limit the freedom of expression of the will of the person passing through the case, is not aimed at extorting testimony pleasing to the investigator.

Everything that limits the freedom of expression of the will of the accused, suspect, victim and witness is detrimental to the disclosure of the truth and is illegal.

The use of mental influence on a person participating in a criminal case is lawful if none of the following requirements is violated: a mental method should not be based on the ignorance of the accused (suspect) or other persons in legal matters; should not humiliate the dignity of the individual and restrict the freedom of expression of his will; should not forcibly influence the position of the guilty, induce him to admit non-existent guilt, to slander innocent, false testimony.

The investigator must remember that the guarantee of individual rights and legal proceedings is at the same time a guarantee of reaching the truth.

The system of methods of lawful mental influence on persons opposing the investigation.

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

1) familiarization of the opposing person with the system of available evidence, disclosure of their legal significance, conviction of the futility of countering the investigator; explaining the benefits of sincere repentance;

2) creating subjective ideas about the amount of evidence in the person under investigation, leaving him in the dark about the evidence actually available;

3) correction of erroneous ideas about the ignorance of the investigator;

4) creation of conditions for the actions of the person under investigation leading to his exposure; temporary connivance with tricks, the totality of which can be revealing;

5) the system of presenting evidence in order of their increasing importance, the sudden presentation of the most significant, incriminating evidence;

6) the commission by the investigator of actions that allow their ambiguous interpretation by the person under investigation;

7) the use of surprise, lack of time and information for thoughtful counter-actions of the opposing person 1 ;

8) demonstration of the possibilities of objectively establishing hidden circumstances, regardless of his testimony.

The presentation of material evidence to him and the disclosure of their revealing significance, the possibilities of forensic examination, have a great psychological impact on the person under investigation.

The investigator takes into account and uses the emotional reactions of the accused to those material evidence that are significant only for him and are neutral in themselves. Thus, the presentation of the shoes and clothes of the murdered person is emotionally significant for the guilty and neutral for the innocent. But the role of emotional; reactions in the investigation should not be exaggerated. They may occur for various reasons.

In some cases, the person who locks himself may interpret his emotional manifestations as a "failure", giving away a "secret".

For the purpose of legitimate mental influence, it is possible to set mental tasks for the person under investigation related to the logic of the event under investigation.

The increased mental activity of the accused in case of his involvement in the crime under investigation may be accompanied by acute re-experiencing of individual episodes of the crime.

When examining 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 they tried several times to hang it on a nail hammered into the upper part of the window frame due to the fact that the street lamp illuminated the interior of the store well. Suspicion of the theft fell on a certain P. During interrogation to him was The use of the lack of time and information of the opposing person should not be interpreted in the spirit of the traditional device of "taking by surprise". An analysis of the practice of investigation shows that the answers received in the course of "taking by surprise" are rarely associated with an involuntary "giving out" of the truth. In most cases, such "suddenness" does not advance the investigator along the path of knowing the truth, but often leads to a breakdown in communicative contact. Along with this, the sudden presentation of weighty 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 legitimate mental influence.

Only one question was asked: "Do you think the perpetrator was seen by passersby trying to curtain the window of the store?" Bearing in mind that the blanket fell off several times and had to be hung up again, while standing at the brightly lit window, P. decided that he had been seen and identified by one of his acquaintances. Considering himself exposed, P. admitted his guilt.

Many of the methods of influencing a person opposing the investigation are connected with the formation of a certain "image of the investigator." 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 even a temporary success in counteraction, strengthening the attitude to denial, and refrain from interacting with the person under investigation in tactically unfavorable situations. In tactically the most favorable situations, the investigator enhances his legitimate influence, using the mental effect of "accumulation of feelings"

The procedurally regulated activity of the investigator is carried out by the 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.

The execution of each investigative action is regulated by law. Detention, examination, interrogation and search are urgent investigative actions.

Conclusion

The activity of the investigator is connected with his direct interaction with the participants in the criminal process. Possible opposition of interested parties requires the investigator to implement certain behavioral strategies, reflectively control the behavior of opposing individuals, and use psychologized tactics.

The basis of action here is information processes. However, if at the stage of searching for a criminal, information is mainly extracted from the circumstances of the crime, then when interacting with persons involved in the case, information processes are conditioned by the mental states of these persons, their position in relation to justice and their attitude towards this investigator.

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

Each accused, suspect, victim and witness has their own burning problems, burning questions that center around the case under investigation. They build their contacts with the investigator in terms of their relationship to the crime event. (And here the common recommendations regarding the establishment of "psychological contacts", which are offered by some lawyers involved in forensic psychology, are unacceptable, when it is proposed to establish "psychological contact" with chess fans by talking about the intricacies of the Queen's Gambit, and with a fisherman - about the peculiarities of biting in the autumn-winter period.)

The task of the investigator is from the very beginning to find the basis in the positive social ties that a given person has, to strengthen these ties, to excite socially positive, civic motives of behavior. The general strategy of the investigator's behavior does not consist in flirting with the person being interrogated, not in finding any common amateur interests, but in the worthy implementation by the investigator of his social and civic role, official duty.

Bibliography

1. Baranov P.P., V.I. Kurbatov. Legal psychology. Rostov-on-Don, "Phoenix", 2007.

2. Bondarenko T. A. Legal psychology for investigators. M., 2007.

3. Volkov V.N., Yanaev S.I. Legal psychology. M., 2005.

4. Vasiliev V.L. "Legal Psychology": Textbook - St. Petersburg, 2006.

5. Enikeev M.I. Legal psychology. M., 2006.

6. Psychological techniques in the work of a lawyer. Stolyarenko O.M. M., 2006.

7. Shikhantsov G.G. Legal psychology. M., 2006.

ESSAY

on the course "Legal psychology"

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

INTRODUCTION

1. Communicative activity of the investigator

2. Psychology of the victim and witness

Conclusion

INTRODUCTION

1 . Communicative activity of the 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;

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

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

The act of arraignment consists of announcing the charge and explaining to the accused his rights.

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

A tough stance is needed against those accused of malicious murder.

The personality of the accused, as a rule, is contradictory - some of their assessments, acquittal, are directed at themselves, others, accusatory - at those around them.

A person condemns himself only in those cases when he crosses the boundaries of his own behavioral principles.

2 . Psychology of the victimand witness

On the other hand, an objective study of the damage caused to the victim is a condition for clarifying the social danger of the committed criminal act.

The testimony of the victim is a means of protecting his interests, but these are not only individual interests, but the interests of a person as a member of society.

When interacting with the victim, the investigator should take into account his negative emotional state resulting from the crime and its consequences.

Many victims are characterized by a state of increased level of anxiety and, as a consequence of this, destabilization of personal mental integration, impaired social adaptation.

Psychology of Witnesses

When interacting with the investigator, the witness adheres to a certain line of conduct, gives his assessment of the reported facts, is silent about something, and makes omissions. They can be caused by various motives - fear of revenge, pity, the desire to get rid of witness duties, 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. (More on the psychology of witnesses will be discussed in the chapter "The Psychology of Interrogation and Confrontation".)

Psychological contact in investigative activities

Interpersonal communication in 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 procedure norms. The formality inherent in this type of communication greatly complicates and constrains the mental activity of persons involved in the case and requires the investigator to have communicative flexibility, the use of special means of activating communication.

Negative attitudes may also prevail in the position of individual investigators - an extremely negative attitude towards the antisocial personality of the accused or suspect and the associated arrogance, arrogance, a sense of superiority, etc.

Entering into communication with persons passing on the case in the forensic psychological literature is often called the establishment of psychological contact. At the same time, the term "psychological contact" means an emotionally positive relationship based on common interests and unity of goals of communicating persons. Since the participants in a criminal case do not have a permanent unity of goals and interests in legal proceedings, it is advisable to replace the term "psychological contact" with the term "communicative contact", which exempts from the mandatory search for common interests and goals, mutual emotionally positive experiences in the conditions of preliminary investigation.

For a negative attitude towards the accused and the suspected investigator, especially at the beginning of the investigation, there is no reason - the truth has yet to be established. But even the guilty and convicted remains a citizen of the state with all the ensuing rights and social status.

The investigator should not have a negative attitude towards persons under investigation, conflict interaction with them. There is no general, global conflict between the investigator and persons under investigation. The task of the investigator is to overcome even temporary conflict situations and in any case achieve the goal of the investigation - to establish the truth about the event under investigation.

Physical coercion should be distinguished from physical violence. It is allowed by law during arrest, detention, compulsory examination and obtaining samples for comparative research.

Overcoming resistance, the investigator does not set the task of breaking the opposing personality, belittling it, winning the fight against it.

From the means and methods of unlawful mental violence associated with obtaining evidence pleasing to the investigator, lawful methods of mental coercion should be distinguished.

Above, the need to rely on positive social connections and positive qualities of a person opposing the investigator was noted. Is it permissible, along with this, to use his negative mental and moral qualities - emotional instability, irascibility, unscrupulousness, vanity, vindictiveness, etc. We believe that the means of achieving the truth is permissible if the person who testifies remains free in choosing the line of his behavior. This is the criterion for the legitimacy of mental influence.

Did the investigator have a moral right to such a reception? Did he divulge with all this the intimate aspects of the life of the person under investigation? No, he didn't. K.'s photographs could have ended up on his desk for other reasons. There was no extortion of testimony from P.'s wife here. The procedural rights and interests of the individual were not violated.

So, when faced with the stubborn denial of the interrogated, the investigator uses "harsh" methods of mental influence, but they should not be associated with the previous position of the investigator. The investigator influences not the content of the testimony, but the motivational sphere of the person being interrogated (by explaining the advantage of the legal significance of the evidence, a special system for presenting it, etc.), while the impact on the anticipated activity of a person who evades correct testimony is essential.

All tactics have a psychic effect, but they must not be violent. Purpose of mental influence. - overcoming attitudes to counteract, convincing the opposing person of the need for truthful behavior.