Expert Examination

EXPERT EXAMINATION. The concept of E. and its application. E. in the broad sense is called the examination of any subject or fact with the help of persons possessing special knowledge in a given science, art, or craft. E. can be applied for the most diverse reasons, for example, E. of a structure to determine its suitability for operation, E. of a work of art (painting) to establish its author, etc. But E. has particular significance in the process of criminal investigation and court as one of the evidentiary facts. The codes of criminal procedure of all states recognize E. as an independent and rather important piece of evidence and indicate that experts are attracted when the investigator or court requires research or evaluation of circumstances or objects with the help of special knowledge. Thus, an expert is a knowledgeable person. E. as a court evidence appeared in the judicial process later than other types of evidence and underwent a certain evolution until it reached its modern state. Initially, an expert was viewed as an instrument of the judge. This view, however, was soon abandoned, and an expert came to be viewed as a kind of witness. This view has to this day remained, for example, in English judicial practice, but also cannot be considered valid. Liberal lawyers of the late 19th century put forward the view of an expert as a scientific judge of facts. This view still enjoys sympathy among many judicial and forensic medicine practitioners to the present day, but is to a certain extent abstract. The most correct approach is to view E. as a completely special type of court evidence, and experts as the closest assistants to the investigation and court. This approach is also implemented in the latest 'Regulation on the Production of Forensic Medical Examination', approved by the People's Commissariat of Health and the People's Commissariat of Justice in 1934 (Art. 1). Judicial practice, and in some countries legislation, know 3 ways of attracting experts, namely E. can be: 1) official, 2) sworn, and 3) free. Official E. is such a type of E. when an expert engages in this type of E. as a profession, has special knowledge and experience in his specialty and is attracted by the court, investigation and other bodies to conduct E. as an official. Under the name of s w o r n E. is meant such a procedure when government bodies compile a special list of persons who can be experts, and courts can call an expert only from among persons named in the list. In free E., the choice of expert is left entirely to the discretion of the calling body, which independently selects experts from among persons of certain qualifications. At present, everywhere there is a tendency to develop and prefer official E., especially for the most common types of E. For example, forensic medical E. almost everywhere, including in the USSR, exists as official. Experts in chemistry and forensic science are also in many places in the position of official experts. Sworn E. was most developed in France. In the USSR there are no special legal provisions regarding sworn E., and this type of E. is rarely encountered here, for example, in relation to accounting, economic E. More developed here, after official E., is free E. General rules for conducting E. E. as court evidence is provided for by our laws (Criminal Procedure Code 57, 58, 63, Civil Procedure Code 48). Besides the judicial process, E. is also necessary in many other cases, for example, in social security bodies to determine the degree of loss of working capacity, in the military department to determine the suitability of conscripts for military service, in sanitary supervision bodies to determine the suitability of food products, etc. In these cases, the procedure for E. is regulated by special rules and instructions, and sometimes by practice. The conduct of E. consists of three stages: 1) conducting research, collecting materials, examination, 2) presenting a report to the calling body based on the results of research, and 3) stating the E. The conduct of research begins with the selection of an expert. If for this type of E. there is an official expert approved in the established manner, then the selection of an expert presents no difficulty. In free E., it is necessary to choose an expert of certain qualifications to ensure the reliability of E. In addition to formal certification of competence (certificates, testimonials, diplomas), the body attracting the expert must also be guided by additional data (scientific reputation, reviews of scientific and educational institutions, length of service, etc.). In some cases, the law or instructions directly indicate the qualifications of experts (for example, a physician for medical E.). The court or investigators appoint E. in cases where special knowledge in art, science, or craft is required (Criminal Procedure Code 63). The appointment of E., except in cases specially indicated, is not mandatory and depends on the discretion of the investigator or court (Criminal Procedure Code 57). Experts are summoned by the investigator, inquiry body, or court. The rule by which a party can enter into an agreement with an expert and independently attract him is alien to our legislation, but the investigator can summon an expert indicated by the accused and has the right to refuse such summons if summoning the indicated expert is impossible or threatens to delay the investigation (Criminal Procedure Code 169). Experts are summoned, just like witnesses, by summons (Criminal Procedure Code 162, 130). However, in many cases, especially in official E., the investigator sends the objects of research to the expert himself on designated days and hours. The number of experts is not specified by our law, but is determined by the investigator and court (Criminal Procedure Code 169); only some rules indicate the need for a commission for certain types of E. (Regulation 16). In official E., the expert is obliged to perform his functions in an official capacity. In sworn or free E., the obligation to conduct E. is a general civic duty and the expert has no right to refuse to perform these functions (Criminal Procedure Code 64). For refusal of E. and non-appearance, he is held liable on the same basis as a witness (Criminal Procedure Code 60, 62, Criminal Code 92). Although not specified in the law, judicial practice and common sense exclude liability of experts for refusal of E. in cases where the expert being summoned considers himself incompetent or unknowledgeable in the specialty for which he is invited to give E. The expert is also given the right to refuse E. in cases of insufficient material for E. (Criminal Procedure Code 171, note, Regulation 21, 22). The attraction of experts has a personal character, especially in cases of sworn and free E., and a person attracted as an expert cannot replace himself with another. With respect to experts, there is recusal in cases where he is a party or relative of any of the parties, if he or his relatives are interested in the outcome of the case, and if he participated in the case as a witness, investigator, prosecutor, defender, civil plaintiff, or representative of the interests of the victim (Criminal Procedure Code 43-46, 48). This rule has particularly important significance in cases where a physician who treated the patient before his death is attracted as an expert. In these cases, the physician is always a witness, and sometimes also becomes an accused and must himself recuse himself from E. (Criminal Procedure Code 45). The procedure for questioning experts is indicated in Chapter XIII of the Criminal Procedure Code, Arts. 168-174. Of these articles, Art. 171 is particularly important, granting the expert the right to familiarize himself with the circumstances of the case and the right to refuse E. in case of insufficient materials. The expert has the right to demand the statement of points on which a conclusion must be given (also Regulation 25). As for the presence of the investigator and witnesses during E., the law indicates the obligation of their presence only during inspections and examinations (Criminal Procedure Code 194), while granting them the right to record in the protocol statements about those actions of the physician-expert that seem questionable to them. Art. 8 of the Regulation more definitely speaks of the obligation of presence of representatives of judicial-investigatory bodies 'if they consider it necessary'. According to established practice, almost all types of E., except autopsies in rural areas, are conducted in the absence of representatives of judicial-investigatory authority, which is not always desirable. The presence of representatives of judicial-investigatory authority during autopsies is generally desirable, and in many cases is necessary to clarify questions of interest to the inquiry bodies. The report on research or the conclusion of the expert is presented only to the body or person_g that invited the expert. To no one else should the data of E. be communicated until the case is concluded (Criminal Code 96, Regulation 28). In the conclusion, the expert must give answers to all questions posed by the judicial-investigatory authority. In addition, the expert himself may raise new questions for resolution and give answers to them. The expert's conclusion must be thoroughly motivated. If there are several experts, they are given the right to consult with each other (Criminal Procedure Code 172). If the opinion of the experts is unanimous, it is stated by one of them; in case of disagreement, each states his opinion (Criminal Procedure Code 173). After giving the conclusion, questions may be put to each expert (ibid.).

An expert may also be summoned to a court session. Expert examination in a court session has certain peculiarities. The expert remains in the courtroom throughout the entire judicial investigation, but the court may deem it necessary to remove the experts (Criminal Procedure Code 275). Examination of experts is conducted by both the court and the parties (Criminal Procedure Code 298, 171). The right of an expert to question the accused and witnesses is not provided by law, but it has been firmly established throughout the USSR by judicial practice and is mentioned in the Regulations (Article 22). An important question is whether an expert has the right to provide additional explanations to the court after the arguments of the parties, if it becomes apparent that the parties have misunderstood or misinterpreted the conclusion of the expert examination. In some cases, the court grants this right to the expert, while in others it refuses. Article 23 allows for this possibility. The law and judicial practice recognize the special importance of expert examination as judicial evidence, although the opinion of the expert is not binding on the court. However, the court's disagreement with the expert examination must be thoroughly motivated in the verdict or a special ruling (Criminal Procedure Code 298, 174). Poor quality, incompleteness of the expert examination, or disagreement with it does not serve as grounds for rejecting the given expert examination, but requires a new expert examination to be conducted (Criminal Procedure Code 174, 300). The presentation, or documentation, of the expert examination is an extremely important moment in the work of experts, since the document left by the expert in the court case serves as the basis for a series of investigative actions. The protocol of examination of corpses, material evidence, and other objects with the opinion or conclusion of the expert is called an act, and during examination of living persons it is called a certificate. The law indicates the necessity of drawing up a protocol of expert examination (Criminal Procedure Code 174, 168, 192) and submitting a written conclusion to the court after the oral one (Criminal Procedure Code 298). Documents of forensic medical expert examination, depending on the nature and object of the examination, are called protocols, acts, or certificates. The protocol of expert examination consists of an introduction and a descriptive part (Criminal Procedure Code 78, Regulations 10-13). In the introduction, the place and time of the examination, the grounds for the examination (requirement of the investigator, court, etc.), the name of the expert, the subject of the examination, those present during the examination, and brief preliminary information are indicated. In the descriptive part, the results of the research are presented. This protocol is signed by the expert and those present, if there were any (investigator, witnesses). If an opinion or conclusion of the expert is attached to the protocol, it is called an act for major examinations (autopsies, examination of material evidence, psychiatric examinations, etc.), and for minor examinations, such as ordinary examinations of living persons, it is called certificates. The conclusion is signed only by experts. A document about the examination must possess certain qualities: it must be written in generally understandable expressions, on clean paper, legibly, in ink or on a typewriter. The expert must leave a copy of the document or record his examinations in a special book (Regulation 30). If the examination is conducted not in the premises of an official body, then the act of expert examination is sent to the body that requested the examination only by mail or through an official courier, but not through the accused, victim, witness, or other interested party (Regulation 5, note 14). If the conclusion of the experts is recorded by the court secretary, the expert must necessarily familiarize himself with the secretary's record and confirm its correctness with his signature. It is better, however, if the expert submits a handwritten conclusion to the court, since secretaries often record the expert's conclusion inaccurately, and during the session the conditions hinder proper verification of the records. The law provides for the expert's responsibility for deliberately false conclusions, equating such to perjury (Criminal Procedure Code 170, Criminal Code 95, 120), for refusal to conduct an examination and non-appearance (Criminal Procedure Code 60, 62, Criminal Code 92), and for disclosure of the secrecy of the examination (Criminal Code 96, Regulation 29). If an official or private expert conducted an examination without observing proper rules or carelessly, he may be subject to disciplinary punishment or held liable under Article III of the Criminal Code. An error by the expert due to good-faith mistake or lack of knowledge does not serve as grounds for holding him liable, but necessitates a new examination. Types of medical expert examination. Medical expert examination is most frequently encountered in judicial proceedings, especially in criminal cases, and in these cases it is called forensic medical examination, but in many other cases of public and private life, a doctor has to act in the role of an expert - medical-insurance, military, sanitary. Our law attaches particular importance to forensic medical examination. Specifically, Article 63, note 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code provides for mandatory types of examination, and all of them are of medical nature - determination of the cause of death, severity of injury, and mental state of the accused or witness. Articles 174 and 300 of the Criminal Procedure Code provide for a special procedure for appointing repeated examinations in cases of medical examination. Articles 193-195 specifically provide for cases of examination of corpses and living persons. Finally, forensic medical examination is regulated by a whole series of rules, instructions, and circulars. In criminal proceedings, examination with the help of doctors is necessary in almost all cases of crimes related to violations of personal inviolability. These are the following articles of the Criminal Code: 136-139 - various types of murder, 140 - abortion, 141 - driving to suicide, 142-146 - various types of bodily injuries and other violent acts, 147, part 2 - deprivation of liberty in a dangerous manner or with causing physical suffering, 148 - placement of a healthy person in a psychiatric hospital, 150-154 - various types of sexual crimes, 156-157 - leaving without help, failure to provide assistance, 180 - illegal medical practice, 181 - violation of sanitary rules. In addition, it is often necessary to conduct examinations in cases involving medical personnel under Article III of the Criminal Code and in all cases when it is necessary to determine the mental state of the accused or witness, the degree of loss of working capacity, and age. In civil cases, medical examination is less common, mainly for determining working capacity, age, legal capacity, general state of health, productive capacity, origin of the child, etc. No special cases of mandatory medical examination and procedure for this examination are indicated in the Civil Procedure Code. Social-labor medical examination stands apart, falling under the jurisdiction of special bodies. Organization of forensic medical examination in the USSR has an official character (Regulation 19), although the law also recognizes the possibility of free forensic medical examination in cases where it is impossible to summon an official forensic medical expert (Criminal Procedure Code 193). At present, forensic medical examination operates on the basis of the aforementioned 'Regulations' of 1934, which comprehensively regulates the activities of the expert, his duties and rights. In addition, there is a whole series of general and specific rules and instructions concerning various aspects of forensic medical examination. From general orders, it should be noted: the circular of the People's Commissariat of Health and the People's Commissariat of Justice No. 13/mv of January 11, 1928 'On improving the organization of forensic medical examination in rural areas', which positively regulates the activities of the expert and his relations with investigation and court bodies; the resolution of the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR of January 15, 1928, granting forensic medical experts the right to travel on all trains and ships, the right to purchase tickets out of turn, and obliging local executive committees to provide experts with premises for conducting examinations and necessary auxiliary personnel; the resolution of the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR of June 15, 1928 'On improving the material and living conditions of forensic medical experts', granting experts the right to scientific business trips, the right to a monthly vacation (orders concerning specific types of examination are given below). All forensic medical examination is under the jurisdiction of health authorities (Regulations 2-4) and consists of three instances: 1) district, inter-district, and city forensic medical experts, 2) regional, provincial, city inspectors for forensic medical examination, 3) the chief forensic medical inspector of the People's Commissariat of Health. Chapter II of the Regulations specifies the general working conditions of the expert: an expert may be a person holding the title of physician; examination with the help of paramedics, midwives, etc. is prohibited (Regulation 20). The expert must show initiative in all cases (Regulation 1, 26), has the right to involve consultants (Regulation 28), demand additional research - laboratory, X-ray, etc. (Regulation 15, 17, 18), direct objects for special laboratory forensic medical research (Regulation 32); should also participate in public work and in the general work of health authorities (Regulation 1, 27, 34). However, local health authorities have no right to assign to the expert work that does not fall within his duties as an expert (Regulation 33). Usually, examination is conducted individually, except in cases of psychiatric examination, determination of the degree of loss of working capacity, in medical cases, repeated examinations, and particularly complex examinations, when examination is conducted in commissions with the involvement of relevant specialists (Regulation 16, 28). The duties of district experts are specifically provided for in Chapter III of the Regulations (Articles 35, 44). For them, a qualification requirement is established in the form of a one-year internship or special courses.

Appointment and dismissal of experts is carried out by the regional (provincial) inspector for forensic medicine. 9. Usually an expert serves two to three districts, where he performs all types of Expert Examination according to the requirements of investigative and other bodies. In addition, he is obliged to check random Expert Examinations, instruct physicians, carry out individual assignments of the regional inspector, has an assistant in his staff, and is obliged to submit a report on his activities. He has his own seal. Small towns are served by district experts. Large cities, with a population of over 100,000 inhabitants, have separate city experts in numbers depending on the size of the city. The norm for experts is 1 per 100,000 inhabitants in the city and 250,000 population in rural areas, but this norm is far from being fulfilled in all cases. Payment of permanent experts is made according to point 10 of the law of March 4, 1935, on the same basis as sanitary inspectors, i.e., depending on length of service—350, 450, and 550 rubles (Resolution of the USSR Council of People's Commissars of April 28, 1935, No. 839 and instruction of the People's Commissariat of Health of the RSFSR on increasing wages, § 14). The entire business of forensic Expert Examination in the region, province or ASSR is managed by the regional (provincial) inspector for forensic Expert Examination. His rights and duties are provided for in Chapter IV of the Regulations (Articles 45-52). He is appointed by the regional (provincial) department of health from among physicians with forensic medical experience of at least 5 years, is subordinate directly to the head of the health department, and in scientific and practical matters—to the chief inspector, to whom he submits reports. He supervises the activities of experts, checks their Expert Examinations, and appoints commissions for repeated and special Expert Examinations. A forensic medical laboratory is attached to him, usually one per region or province, performing forensic medical analyses. - The third instance of forensic Expert Examination is the chief forensic medical inspector, appointed by the People's Commissar of Health and subordinate directly to the People's Commissar or his deputy. His rights and duties are provided for in Chapter V of the Regulations (Articles 53-60). He directs all forensic Expert Examination in the republic and works in close contact with the Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Medicine. For repeated and especially complex Expert Examinations, he appoints a commission under his chairmanship. In relation to laboratory forensic Expert Examination, the highest authority is the Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Medicine (Sections 61, 71). Objects of forensic Expert Examination. The activity of a forensic medical expert has three main objects: 1) dead bodies, 2) living persons, and 3) material evidence. At present, due to the peculiarities of the matter, it is necessary to single out a fourth object of the expert's activity—cases involving the medical personnel in criminal liability. The necessity of examining dead bodies arises in cases of violent death or when there are suspicions of violence, for example, signs of injury on the body or sudden death. A forensic medical autopsy is often preceded by an examination of the body by the expert and investigator at the scene of the incident. This examination must be conducted very carefully and thoroughly, as it provides initial traces for solving the crime, but in no case can it serve as a basis for a conclusion about the cause of death without subsequent autopsy. Examination and autopsy are regulated by the Code of Criminal Procedure (Articles 191, 193) and special 'Rules for Forensic Medical Examination of Bodies', approved by the People's Commissariats of Health and Justice on January 7, 1929. Forensic medical autopsy has a significant difference from pathological-anatomical. The latter aims to verify the diagnosis and treatment of patients who died in a medical institution and scientific development, while forensic medical autopsy aims primarily to establish the cause of death, external conditions and circumstances of death that are of importance for the investigation and court. Therefore, in forensic medical autopsy, various kinds of details, as well as the examination of clothing, acquire special importance. The documentation of forensic medical autopsy must meet certain requirements and is characterized by great detail. The technique of forensic medical autopsy is borrowed from pathological-anatomical, but allows significant deviations depending on the case. In cases of suspected poisoning, infanticide, cases of burning of bodies, etc., the peculiarities of autopsy are very significant (for more details on forensic medical autopsy—see Autopsy). A special place in the examination of bodies is occupied by exhumation (see Exhumation of the body). It is carried out in cases when suspicion of violent death arises after burial or when the initial autopsy is considered insufficient or poor. There are no regulations governing exhumation, either in the law or in the rules of autopsy. According to established practice, the investigator issues a reasoned conclusion on the conduct of exhumation and invites at least two experts for this purpose. The expert who performed the initial autopsy may participate in the exhumation if there is no question of holding him responsible for the poor initial autopsy. Then the investigator, together with the experts, goes to the place of burial of the body, establishes the grave of the deceased by questioning relatives and persons present at the burial. Then the coffin is dug up, opened, and the body is presented to the same persons for identification. If the identity of the body is established, it is subjected to forensic medical examination, usually right there at the cemetery or in the nearest suitable room, less often it is taken to the morgue. A protocol is drawn up of all actions related to exhumation and identification of the body. Examination of living persons is carried out for the most diverse reasons. Most often, such a reason is various kinds of bodily injuries. Usually examinations are carried out in a special forensic medical outpatient clinic or in a general outpatient clinic at certain hours. If the patient cannot move on his own, the investigator or court may suggest that the expert go to the place of the patient's location for examination (at home, in the hospital, at the scene of the incident, etc.). If necessary, the expert may issue a conclusion on the need to place the patient in a stationary medical institution for examination, which is then carried out by the body that requested the Expert Examination. This especially applies to cases of psychiatric Expert Examination. The documentation of Expert Examination of living persons is much simpler than that of Expert Examination of the body. In simple cases of examination, a simple certificate is drawn up, signed by the expert. In cases of psychiatric Expert Examination and other more complex cases, a complete act is drawn up. The examination of injuries is regulated by special 'Rules for Drawing up a Conclusion on the Severity of Injury', approved by the People's Commissariats of Health and Justice on January 27, 1928. The main task of the expert is to assess the severity of the injury, the time and method of infliction, and the consequences of the injury. These rules also apply to the examination of injuries on bodies, where the physician must establish the connection of the injury with death, the method and circumstances of infliction of injuries. According to these rules, all injuries are divided into fatal and non-fatal. Fatal injuries are those that caused death; they are divided into absolutely fatal, which always cause death in all people, although not immediately, and conditionally fatal, which caused death due to individual characteristics of the organism, existing pathological conditions, or due to accidental external circumstances. Non-fatal injuries, in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure (Articles 142, 143), are divided into serious and minor, and the latter in turn are divided into minor, causing disturbance of health, and minor without disturbance of health. Serious injuries include life-threatening injuries, even if they ended in complete recovery, as well as injuries that resulted in the loss of function of an important organ (vision, hearing, hand, foot, reproductive ability), indelible disfigurement of the face, or other disturbance of health associated with loss of more than 1/3 of working capacity. Minor bodily injuries with disturbance of health include those that caused permanent loss of working capacity of less than 1/8, or prolonged impairment of organ function, or a non-life-threatening prolonged illness. All other injuries are classified as minor without disturbance of health. As can be seen, these criteria have significant shortcomings and cause the most diverse interpretations, all the more so that Expert Examination of injuries is often carried out by district and outpatient physicians, inexperienced in the subtleties of forensic medical assessment of injuries. In many cases, it is necessary to conduct Expert Examination of sexual conditions, in particular reproductive ability in men, in cases of sexual crimes and paternity recognition. This also includes Expert Examination of impotence. There are no official guiding instructions for these types of Expert Examination, but it should always be borne in mind that an accurate conclusion is possible only on the basis of strictly objective data. Anamnesis cannot be taken into account here. Therefore, impotence can be established by a forensic medical expert only in the presence of anatomical or organic diseases. Expert Examination of the sexual condition of women is very often carried out on issues of sexual crimes (Criminal Code Articles 150-154), to establish existing or past pregnancy, past childbirth, illegal abortion, etc.

Regarding the question of obstetric-gynecological Expert Examination, there are detailed 'Rules for Ambulatory Forensic Medical Gynecological Examination', approved by the People's Commissariat of Health and the People's Commissariat of Justice on December 31, 1934. They provide detailed provisions for the procedure of conducting these Expert Examinations. Article 150 of the Criminal Code, which provides for liability for infecting with venereal disease, also requires a corresponding Expert Examination. This Expert Examination, by its nature, presents considerable difficulties and must necessarily be conducted by a forensic medical expert together with a venereologist. There are no special rules for this.-Expert Examination of a child's paternity is conducted in cases of alimony claims and evasion of alimony payments (Criminal Code 158). Regarding this type of Expert Examination, usually conducted by comparing the blood group characteristics of the child, mother, and putative father, there are a number of directives within the People's Commissariat of Justice. Initially, this type of Expert Examination was rejected (Circular of the People's Commissariat of Health and the People's Commissariat of Justice No. 127 of June 5, 1925, and of the People's Commissariat of Justice of February 20, 1926). Subsequently, the People's Commissariat of Justice permitted the use of this Expert Examination in connection with other evidence (Circular of April 28, 1926). The Civil Cassation Collegiate of the Supreme Court of the RSFSR expressed itself in the same sense in 1929. As a result, Expert Examination of a child's paternity is rarely applied. It should be noted that in this Expert Examination, in some cases, one can only exclude, but not establish paternity. The right to conduct this Expert Examination is held only by laboratories listed in a special list of the People's Commissariat of Health (Section 70).-Expert Examination of general health condition to determine the degree of loss of working capacity is conducted at the request of the court or investigation in cases where it is necessary to establish the effect on the body of a former injury, abortion, or other criminal act that caused the loss of working capacity. There are no special rules for determining the degree of loss of working capacity, and practice here is very diverse. Determination of age is necessary in judicial cases to establish boundary ages that change or exclude criminal responsibility and certain measures of social protection (12, 16, 18 years). Determination of age is also necessary in all cases of corpse examination if the age is unknown from documents. In non-judicial cases, age must be determined upon admission to school, upon conscription for military service, and in other cases if there are no documents certifying age.-According to Circular No. 13/mv (see above), determination of the state of intoxication is not within the duties of forensic medical experts, except in cases where the person being examined is involved in a criminal offense. Forensic psychiatric Expert Examination is conducted exclusively at the request of investigative bodies or the court if they have doubts about the mental health of the accused or witness. According to Article 11 of the Criminal Code, measures of social protection of a corrective nature cannot be applied to persons who committed a crime in a state of chronic or temporary mental illness, or if the accused became mentally ill by the time the verdict is rendered. A mentally ill witness also cannot give testimony of full value for the court. The fact of mental illness and the criminal responsibility of the accused is established by a commission with the mandatory participation of psychiatrists. According to Circular No. 13/mv, paragraph 166, psychiatric Expert Examination should also be under the jurisdiction of regional and territorial forensic medical inspectors, but this instruction is usually not observed, and forensic psychiatric Expert Examination is conducted by psychiatrists independently. In case of the need for stationary testing, the subjects are placed in special psychiatric institutions (in Moscow - in the Serbsky Institute of Forensic Psychiatry). Forensic medical Expert Examination of material evidence is conducted in special forensic medical laboratories (see Material Evidence, Forensic Medicine) by forensic laboratory experts and chemical experts. The practical forensic physician, whether official or occasional, is responsible for finding, initial examination, and forwarding to forensic medical laboratories of various suspicious items and further evaluation of the research results in conjunction with all other evidence. For conducting forensic medical and forensic chemical examination of material evidence, there are special 'Rules', approved by the People's Commissariat of Health and the People's Commissariat of Justice on November 7, 1934. In the Regulations on the Conduct of Laboratory Expert Examination, Chapter VI, Articles 61-71 state,-Forensic medical Expert Examination in medical cases is conducted in cases involving doctors and other medical and pharmaceutical personnel for negligence, carelessness, error, and direct crimes related to their professional work. This Expert Examination must be conducted on the basis of all materials of the case in special commissions under the regional or territorial inspector (Section 16, 48). Expert Examination on issues of folk healing, quackery, illegal medical practice, etc., should also be conducted by commission, although there are no specific instructions on this matter. Training of personnel for forensic medical Expert Examination. All forensic medical organizations feel a serious shortage of workers. This especially applies to forensic medical laboratories. Forensic medicine is taught in the final year of all faculties: in the therapeutic-prophylactic faculty for 84 hours, in the pediatric faculty for 64 hours, and in the sanitary-hygienic faculty for 49 hours. For preparation for practical forensic medical work, some medical institutes have internship (1 year) and residency (3 years) for graduating physicians. There is also postgraduate study at the departments of forensic medicine and at the Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Medicine. There is a department of forensic medicine at the Central Institute for Advanced Medical Studies. The classes of this department are conducted on the basis of the Institute of Forensic Medicine. The Institute of Forensic Medicine was founded in 1932 and aims to conduct and plan scientific work in forensic medicine, retraining and improvement of personnel, publication of an official organ, conducting Expert Examination of higher instance, and preliminary development of various government and departmental acts on forensic medical Expert Examination.-There are currently no journals on forensic medicine. Until 1931, non-periodic collections 'Forensic Medical Expert Examination' were published, and since 1934, collections 'Forensic Medicine and Borderline Areas' have been published at the Institute.

N. Popov. Expert examination of capacity for work has as its purpose the establishment of: a) complete or partial disability, b) temporary or permanent disability. In the latter case, it is generally necessary to determine the degree of disability, and in individual cases (expert examination of accidents, occupational diseases) to also establish the cause of disability (work-related or non-work-related injury, general or occupational disease). In expert examination of disability, one should proceed from the fact that capacity for work is determined not only by the state of health, but also by the nature and conditions of work, as well as the conditions for the reproduction of labor power (in particular, living conditions). Furthermore, one should remember that leaving work is not always a therapeutic measure. In this regard, the data from the Moscow Scientific Research Institute of Expert Examination of Capacity for Work of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions deserve attention, which showed that in a significant percentage of cases of so-called essential subfebrility, capacity for work is preserved, that remaining at work does not give an objective deterioration in the health condition of patients (according to data from dynamic observation). In some cases, however, capacity for work is only limited. In these cases, it is necessary to change the conditions of work regime or the nature of work itself. The same is evidenced by interesting data from Professor Waldman (Leningrad Institute of Medical-Labor Expert Examination) regarding the great adaptability to work of disabled persons of groups II and III with serious lesions of the cardiovascular system. Since for many nosological forms (cardiovascular, gastro-intestinal, etc. diseases) there are as yet no firm clinical criteria for determining capacity for work, accounting for the effectiveness of labor and morbidity can provide great assistance in determining capacity for work. Expert examination of capacity for work of workers and employees and giving the corresponding conclusion is the basis for certain legal actions: transfer to another job, exemption from work due to illness, receipt of sickness benefits, disability pension, etc. Depending on the purpose of the examination, it is carried out either in medical-labor expert commissions (VTEK), working systematically at the Social Insurance Bureaus of regional trade union councils and individual large industry unions (railway workers, etc.) or periodically, several times a month, at district trade union councils, factory and plant committees at large enterprises, or in medical institutions for examining the patient in a hospital. In medical-labor commissions, expert examination of persistent disability or disability (see) is carried out primarily. The successes of industrialization of our country, the expansion of old industries, accompanied by improvement of the technological process, mechanization of heavy and labor-intensive work, improvement of working conditions at enterprises, have created the possibility of working in new, healthier and lighter working conditions not only for disabled persons who, according to the so-called rational classification existing before 1932, were classified as disabled of groups IV, V and VI, but also for many so-called disabled of groups III and II. In connection with this, the suitability of the term 'disability' in our Soviet conditions was called into question. The unsuitability for the new working conditions of the previously existing so-called rational classification of disability (see) became completely obvious. In 1932 it was replaced by a new classification, which differs fundamentally from the previous one. According to the new classification, only three groups are established (instead of the previous six). The first group includes persons who are not only incapable of any professional work, but also need at the same time constant care, constant help from other persons. The second group includes persons who are incapable of any professional work, but do not need constant care and outside help. The third group includes persons who are able to perform work in their profession irregularly or regularly in lightened working conditions with a shortened working day, with increased breaks during work or finally forced to switch to another regular work, but with sharply reduced qualifications. The new classification of disability in the USSR is significantly better than the previous one. Previously, in expert examination of disability, emphasis was placed on exemption from work, but now the main attention is focused on determining in what conditions the insured person can continue to work and what measures are necessary to increase his capacity for work. Work-related injury and occupational disability. According to Soviet insurance legislation, a larger pension is paid to those who have lost capacity for work due to work-related injury and occupational disease than for disability from general diseases. By circular of the Central Social Insurance Bureau of 13/III 1931, it is established that an injury is considered received in connection with work if it occurred under one of the following circumstances: 1. When the worker was performing his usual work for hire or some assignment of the employer or his authorized representative (including during a business trip). 2. When the worker was performing, even without such an assignment, any actions in the interests of the enterprise (institution, establishment) where he works for hire, as well as in the interests of other enterprises or establishments of the socialized sector of the national economy. 3. When the worker is being sent to the place of work to which he was sent by the personnel department. 4. When the worker is going to work or from work home. 5. When the worker is going to work in case of his transfer to another locality. 6. On the territory of the enterprise (institution, establishment) or at another place of work during working hours (including established breaks) or during the time necessary to put in order the instruments of production, clothing, etc. before the start and after completion of work. 7. Near the enterprise (institution, establishment) or other place of work, if the presence of the worker or employee at this place did not contradict the rules of internal order. 8. When the worker was performing some assignment of a Soviet, party, trade union, cooperative or other public organization, even if this assignment was not connected with the enterprise (institution, establishment) where he worked for hire. 9. When the worker was attending military training sessions, if his position was preserved for him, as well as if he received an injury in connection with activities for the militarization of the population carried out by the Society for Assistance to Defense, Aviation and Chemical Construction. 10. When the worker suffered from kulak violence or while assisting the organs of the militia in restoring public order. When deciding the question of occupational disability, one should be guided by the list of professions provided for in the resolution of the Union Council of Social Insurance of 4/I 1929. Medical-labor expert commissions. The medical-labor expert commissions, according to the Regulations approved by the Secretariat of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions on 7/XII 1933, are entrusted with: a) determining the suitability of workers and employees to perform their previous work or another type of work in accordance with physiological, pathological and functional disorders of the organism; b) classifying disabled workers into one of the established groups of disability; c) establishing the causes of disability—partial or complete (general disease, work-related or non-work-related injury, occupational diseases); d) establishing methods for restoring or increasing capacity for work or preventing disability: 1) directing for training or retraining (requalification) workers and employees with partial loss of capacity for work for their use in other jobs; 2) establishing special lightened working conditions (transfer to another job, work on an incomplete set of machines, shortened working day, additional breaks during working time, additional days off, exemption from work in night shifts, etc.); 3) prescribing necessary therapeutic and preventive measures (night sanatorium, dietetic nutrition, after-treatment, etc.); e) establishing disability of family members who have lost the breadwinner for determining the right to a pension; f) resolving in particularly complex and doubtful questions issues of exemption from work due to temporary disability; g) resolving questions of transfer to another job due to temporary disability for a period of more than one month (establishing the necessity of transfer to another job, the nature of this work and the duration of stay in it); h) resolving complaints on issues of exemption from work due to temporary disability (in particular complaints against the conclusion of the attending physician about transfer to another job for a period not exceeding one month); i) establishing the necessity of a trip for treatment to another city due to temporary loss of capacity for work (except in cases of sanatorium-resort treatment). The composition of VTEK includes: a) a chairman, appointed by the trade union body at which the VTEK is located (factory and plant committee, trade union council, etc.); b) expert physicians in three main specialties: therapist, surgeon, and neuropathologist; c) an expert on industrial-technical issues (as needed), who must be sent by the administration; d) a representative of the health center (only for VTEK at factory and plant committees) without pay.

The Main Expert Labor Commission (VTEK) gives an expert opinion based on: a) a full comprehensive medical examination (with mandatory consideration of the functional state) and, if possible, a psychotechnical examination; b) a production and professional characteristic (technological, professional-hygienic and production assessment); c) a domestic characteristic. To verify the correctness of expert opinions and to prevent disability, the VTEK carries out systematic observation of working disabled persons, as well as workers and employees who are frequently and long-term ill. Before beginning observations, all materials available in the VTEK concerning the given person are studied. Insured persons are referred to the VTEK either by factory committees (for Expert Examination of permanent capacity for work) or directly by medical institutions for examination of temporary disability. In individual cases (if the patient cannot appear before the VTEK due to health), the examination is conducted in a hospital or at the patient's home. Expert Examination of temporary disability. Recently, the approach in the Expert Examination of temporary disability has also changed. Previously, the task of the Expert Examination was to determine whether the patient could continue his work activity, and if not, for how long he should be exempt from work. At present, emphasis is placed on determining under what conditions the patient can continue his work activity (change of work, improvement of working conditions), what measures are necessary to increase his capacity for work and ensure its stability. This became possible due to the resolution of the Council of People's Commissars of the RSFSR of December 23, 1930, on the utilization of temporarily disabled persons in other work without detriment to their treatment and normal restoration of capacity for work, as well as the resolution of the USSR Council of People's Commissars of January 20, 1931, on the transfer of workers to other jobs in case of temporary partial disability. According to this resolution, the transfer to other jobs in case of temporary partial disability of an insured person can be made subject to the following rules: 1) the transfer must be made without material detriment to the worker; 2) only those workers who cannot perform their usual work but are able to perform other work without detriment to their health and without violation of normal treatment may be transferred. In connection with this, the treating physicians in the Expert Examination of capacity for work were assigned the task of determining whether the transfer of the insured person to other work is necessary, as well as to indicate the nature of this work and the approximate duration of stay in it. Persons transferred to other work were provided with temporary disability benefits in the amount of the difference between the previous and new earnings. Expert Examination of temporary disability is carried out primarily by treating physicians, who have been granted this right by health authorities in agreement with trade union organizations. These physicians are granted the right to exempt insured persons from work for up to 30 days. Until recently, there were medical consultations for Expert Examination of temporary disability, and even earlier, medical control commissions. The replacement of collective Expert Examination (by several physicians) with individual Expert Examination by the treating physician was caused by the need to rationalize the work of Expert Examination and became possible due to the accumulation of experience by treating physicians in the process of joint work with insurance physicians and expert specialists and the increased responsibility of health authorities, in particular medical institutions. At present, the insurance authorities retain the right to control the correctness of issuing sick-leave certificates and the conduct of Expert Examination of temporary disability, which they exercise through their insurance physicians working in industry trade unions and factory committees of large enterprises. The treating physician deals with Expert Examination of temporary disability when it comes to temporary exemption of the patient from work, his transfer to other work or discharge of the patient to work. This examination is a complex and responsible act, as it involves the need not only to establish the diagnosis of the disease but also to predict its course, which requires mandatory consideration of production and professional working conditions, as in essence it is a matter of determining professional disability. Moreover, transfer to other work and especially complete exemption from work often entail production losses (downtime) and always involve expenditures of social insurance funds for the payment of benefits during disability, according to the provisions on benefits for temporary disability. The current rules for benefit payment, approved by the Secretariat of the All-Union Central Council of Trade Unions after the transfer of social insurance affairs to the trade unions on September 15, 1933, provide for different rates of payment depending on the length of service, union membership and duration of work at the given enterprise, as well as the industry of employment (higher rates for workers in leading industries). For treating physicians, knowledge of the existing provisions on benefits is absolutely necessary. Expert Examination of temporary disability, along with a conclusion on the period of disability, also includes determination of measures for the quickest restoration of capacity for work and prevention of disability in the future. In this, the possibilities of not only health authorities (preventive and treatment measures) but also social insurance authorities (sanatoriums, rest homes, diet therapy, etc.) are taken into account, on which colossal sums are spent annually, s. shmerling.