Tehtanje objektivnosti sodnoizvedenskih mnenj : diplomsko delo univerzitetnega študijskega programa Varstvoslovje

Trampuš, Nena

| | SLO | ENG | Cookies and privacy

Bigger font | Smaller font

First page > Show document

Show document

Title:	Tehtanje objektivnosti sodnoizvedenskih mnenj : diplomsko delo univerzitetnega študijskega programa Varstvoslovje
Authors:	ID Trampuš, Nena (Author) ID Areh, Igor (Mentor) More about this mentor...
Files:	UN_Trampus_Nena_2023.pdf (1,71 MB) MD5: DE79BB8AE072807EFF5B49AD61D5FD94
Language:	Slovenian
Work type:	Bachelor thesis/paper
Typology:	2.11 - Undergraduate Thesis
Organization:	FVV - Faculty of Criminal Justice and Security
Abstract:	Osnovne kognitivne in socialno-psihološke raziskave so pokazale ranljivi del človeške presoje. Kognitivni procesi, vključeni v forenzično delo, z zaznavanjem, presojanjem, razlaganjem in odločanjem, poleg fizične kontaminacije dokazov, igrajo pomembno vlogo pri zanesljivosti odločitve in zaključka. Prepričanja glede nedolžnosti ali krivde osumljenca so prisotna tudi v pravnih okoljih in vplivajo ter vodijo v zbiranje, oceno in razlago dokazov na način lastnega prepričanja. Vključenost pristranskosti kot vira napake forenzične znanosti je najti tudi v primerih neupravičenih obsodb, zato so mnogi predlagali reformo postopkov v smeri ublažitve škodljivih vplivov nezavedne pristranskosti. Z vidika preverjanja ali prepoznavanja pisca ima tudi forenzična preiskava rokopisa in podpisa že dalj časa trajajočo tradicijo v službi pravosodnega sistema in že nekaj let je v teku razprava o veljavnosti znanja in metodologije. Kritiki so mnenja, da je pri sedanji metodologiji pomanjkanje znanstvene in kvantitativne podlage, kar predstavlja preveč tveganja pri tehtanju s parametri subjektivnosti verjetnostne ocene, ki lahko povzročijo napake in vplivajo na končni zaključek. Tudi dostop sodnih izvedencev do informacij o primeru in uporabi dokazov, ki so tako kot rokopisni in podpisni vzorci v sodnem spisu, lahko nevede prinese pristranskost mnenja in vodi do napačnih sodb. Namen diplomskega dela ni obravnava identifikacije rokopisa ali podpisa, temveč obravnava dileme o pristranskosti sodnih izvedencev in metodologije, ki se uporablja v smislu veljavnosti in splošnega sprejetja na področju forenzične znanosti. Raziskave kažejo, da sodni izvedenci sprejemajo odločitve, izražene kot mnenje, z uporabo analitičnih metod, razvitih z usposabljanjem, izobraževanjem in prakso. Predhodne izkušnje brez premikov k izpopolnitvi zagotavljanja zanesljivosti dokazov in razvoju delovnih postopkov, ki ponujajo avtomatiziran pristop ter zavedanje o viru pristranskosti, ne zadoščajo za preprečitev pristranskosti.
Keywords:	sodnoizvedenska mnenja, objektivnost, subjektivnost, pristranskost, standardi, diplomske naloge
Place of publishing:	Ljubljana
Place of performance:	Ljubljana
Publisher:	N. Trampuš
Year of publishing:	2023
Year of performance:	2023
Number of pages:	IX f., 61 str.
PID:	20.500.12556/DKUM-84345
UDC:	343.148(043.2)
COBISS.SI-ID:	159570947
Publication date in DKUM:	24.07.2023
Views:	384
Downloads:	45
Metadata:
Categories:	FVV
:	Copy citation

Average score:	(0 votes)
Your score:	Voting is allowed only for logged in users.
Share:

Hover the mouse pointer over a document title to show the abstract or click on the title to get all document metadata.

Licences

License:	CC BY-NC-ND 4.0, Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International

Link:	http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/
Description:	The most restrictive Creative Commons license. This only allows people to download and share the work for no commercial gain and for no other purposes.
Licensing start date:	25.05.2023

Secondary language

Language:	English
Title:	Weighing the objectivity of expert opinions
Abstract:	Basic cognitive and social psychological research has shown that human judgment is flawed. The cognitive processes involved in forensic work, for example perception, judgment, interpretation, and decision making, in addition to the physical contamination of evidence, play an important role in the reliability of the decision and conclusion. Beliefs regarding the innocence or guilt of the suspect are also present in the legal environment and lead to the collection, evaluation, and interpretation of evidence based on one's convictions. The involvement of bias as a source of error in forensic science is also found in wrongful conviction cases, which is why many have suggested reforming procedures in the direction of mitigating the harmful effects of subconscious bias. Forensic examination of handwriting and signatures has a long tradition in the service of justice, especially as a verification or identification of the author. However there has been an ongoing debate about the validity of the findings and methodology. Critics believe that the current methodology lacks a scientific and quantitative basis, which poses too many risks when it comes to using the parameters of subjectivity in probability assessment. That can cause errors and influence the conclusions drawn. Even the access of forensic experts to information about the case and the use of evidence such as handwriting and signature samples in the court file may inadvertently introduce bias and lead to incorrect verdicts. This thesis is not concerned with the identification of handwriting or signatures, but rather with the dilemma of bias in forensic experts and the methodology used in terms of validity and general acceptance in the field of forensic science. Research shows that forensic experts form their opinions using methods of analysis developed through training, education, and practice. Prior experience alone is not sufficient to prevent bias, if it is not combined with an effort to improve evidence collection and work processes that provide an automated approach or knowledge of the source of bias.
Keywords:	forensic expert opinions, objectivity, subjectivity, bias, standards

Comments

Leave comment

You must log in to leave a comment.

Comments (0)

0 - 0 / 0

There are no comments!

Back