Proof of fact
Tatnachweis is in criminology by evidence from the prosecution authorities yielded evidence that the perpetrators of crimes committed offense converted.
General
Material evidence and personal evidence can be considered as evidence . The former include objects ( § 94 , § 103 StPO ) of all kinds, evidence such as criminal material (clothing, tools, including weapons; § 147 para. 1 StPO), traces and traces of a criminal offense ( § 103 StPO; e.g. fingerprints , Photographs , videographs , DNA traces ), tape recordings from the control center and reports , traces or characteristics ( Section 86 StPO), certificates and documents ( Section 249 StPO) or results of the investigation (e.g. evidence report , telecommunications surveillance , data retention , video recording ). Personal evidence is provided by witnesses (Section 48 ff. StPO), court experts (Section 72 ff. StPO), examinations and opening of bodies ( Section 87 StPO) or statements , statements and confessions of the accused on the matter ( Section 243 (5) StPO) .
All of these pieces of evidence add up to the evidence of the fact, which must remove any contradictions in evidence and close any gaps in evidence as far as possible. The higher the density of evidence and the more seamlessly the course of events could be clarified, the better the evidence provided.
Legal issues
The criminal law recognizes different suspected extent . These also depend on how far the law enforcement authorities have succeeded in proving the crime. A distinction is made between initial suspicion , sufficient suspicion ( § 170 StPO, § 203 StPO) and urgent suspicion ( § 112 StPO). The initial suspicion presupposes that there are sufficient factual indications of a criminal offense that can be prosecuted (see Section 152 (2) StPO in conjunction with Section 160 (1) StPO); the evidence is comparatively low here. Sufficient suspicion exists if a later conviction is likely based on a preliminary assessment of the evidence situation . An urgent suspicion within the meaning of Section 112, Paragraph 1, Clause 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure exists if it can be inferred from the ascertained facts that the accused is most likely guilty of the offense against which he is charged; mere guesswork is not enough. The urgent suspicion therefore requires the high probability of evidence of the crime.
In January 2015, the Nienburg District Court found for the first time that recordings of a dashcam in criminal proceedings could be used for evidence of the crime according to the additional standards applicable there for the exploitation of evidence - including those obtained inadmissibly. In May 2018, the BGH noted in another case that such a video recording violated Section 4 BDSG because it was made without the consent of the person concerned and could not be based on Section 28 (1) BDSG. Nevertheless, the video recording presented can be used as evidence in accident liability proceedings. In civil proceedings, the inadmissibility or illegality of taking evidence does not necessarily lead to a ban on the use of evidence .
The criminal defense can in no probable cause in court make the request to refuse to open the main proceedings ( § 199 para. 1 StPO). If the investigations offer sufficient reason - with sufficient evidence of the crime - to bring a public complaint , the public prosecutor will raise this by submitting an indictment to the competent court ( Section 170 (1) StPO). The level of information available at the main hearing must be continuously related to the question of whether the evidence of the crime can be provided in accordance with the indictment or whether further evidence is required. A case has been clarified and the evidence of the crime has been fully provided if the course of the event and the perpetrator are unequivocally determined through circumstantial evidence, witness statements or a confession by the perpetrator. If, on the other hand, the evidence is not provided, the accused must be acquitted.
Criminal proceedings
On the basis of the determined course of events, the perpetrator can be proven and thus the evidence can be provided. The criminal case triggered by the indictment will be dealt with before the criminal court as part of a court hearing . The indictment must precisely describe the course of events , the time and place of the crime ( Section 200 (1) StPO ). The most comprehensive knowledge of the course of events is the perpetrator's knowledge , which the law enforcement authorities can only fully understand through a confession . The course of events to be determined on the basis of the evidence and evidence available is subject to judicial assessment of evidence . If there is certainty about the evidence of the crime, it is up to the judge , within the scope of subsumption in criminal proceedings , to subject the resulting criminal offense to the appropriate sanction norm, because the court knows the law ( Latin Jura novit curia ). The result is the criminal judgment in which the evidence is meticulously provided.
statistics
The major eavesdropping , for example, in its main manifestations ( Section 100c, Paragraph 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure) between 1998 and 2008 in 144 investigations in 6% of the statements resulted in direct evidence and in 14% of the cases "further evidence", in 80% of all cases to be worthless.
International
The findings of criminology are used consistently in all states.
Individual evidence
- ^ BGH, decision of October 18, 2007, Az .: StB 34/07
- ^ AG Nienburg, judgment of January 20, 2015, Az .: 4 Ds 155/14
- ↑ BGH, judgment of May 15, 2018, Az .: VI ZR 233/17 = BGH NJW 2018, 2883
- ↑ Louisa Bartel, The Ban on Reconstruction of the Main Trial , 2014, p. 313 f.
- ↑ Helmut König (ed.), The Schwerte case in context , 1998, p. 140
- ↑ BGH, judgment of January 19, 1999, Az .: 1 StR 171/98; so-called pistachio ice cream case II = BGH NJW 1999, 1562
- ↑ Pierre Hauck, Secret criminal prosecution and protection of privacy , 2014, p. 430
