Formalization of forensically relevant data: the mechanism of reflection of personality characteristics in the performance

At the present stage of development of science it is obvious that each person has its own individual motor, speech and behavior features. The learning process does not differ from the total and originally does not prescribe anything individual. Why, then, under the same conditions on the initial path the levels that reflect personality characteristics in crime traces have a number of features allowing to distinguish one person from another, carry out identification, and solve a number of diagnostic problems? To answer this question it is necessary to define a set of reasons providing for individuality and consider the possibility of accurate identification of patterns. Only in this case we can talk about the scientific nature of the ongoing research. If present, the knowledge gained can be applied in practice in the investigation and detection of crime, when the personality of the perpetrator as a set of unique parameters becomes the object of study. The very ability to reflect psycho-physiological characteristics of the individual is based primarily on the effect on the human of subjective (internal) factors. At the same time it is recognized that the objective (external) factors, though indirectly, are also expressed. For the most efficient review of patterns in the article we examine three levels of personality traits outward reflection including crime traces: motor (handwriting, gait, gestures), communicative (speech, facial expressions) and organizational (organization of space and the choice of behavior). Criminology is not so much interested in the theoretical aspect of these levels, but in the practical one, so their consideration will be built on forensically important parameters that allow to prove the validity of the application of the revealed patterns. These parameters are: stability, controllability, situationality, investigatability (formalization). The levels presented in this paper primarily differ in the possibility of voluntary control of personal features reflection. It will be minimum at the motor level of personal features reflection in crime traces, and maximum - at the organizational. We also note that the motor level is associated with mental processes, communicative - with mental processes, states and properties, and organizational - with mental properties. Each level considered is based on its conceptual apparatus. Thus, physical activity is based on the "base" that allows exploring the nature of the skills to understand the stability of their manifestations. Communicative activity is based on a rigid "range" of possible models of response that implies a certain variability. Behavioral activity is characterized by a "standard model" that implies the usual forms of response, although does not exclude unusual ones.

Keywords

Authors

References