Some Problems of Traditional and Innovative Understanding of the Essence and Limits of Proof in Criminal Proceedings

The traditional understanding of the essence and limits of evidence in criminal proceedings is stated. Particular attention is paid to revealing the essence of innovative understanding of the species division of the subject of criminal proof and the procedure of such proof, as well as substantiating the need to replace the adversarial principle of criminal proceedings with the principle of establishing objective truth and resolving cases only on the basis of such truth. It is concluded that in the traditional understanding of the limits of proof in criminal proceedings, it is advisable to distinguish two aspects - the essence of the limits of proof and the criteria for determining the moment of reaching the necessary limits of proof. It is emphasized, that the innovative understanding of the species division of the subject of proof in criminal proceedings is reduced to the selection of the basic subject of proof, that is, the circumstances to be proved in any criminal case; special subject of proof - in certain categories of cases, and partial subject of proof - under special conditions only in certain criminal cases. It is noted, that the procedure of proving in criminal proceedings goes through seven main stages, such as clarifying the nature, sequence and other patterns of work with subjective, objective and mixed sources of criminal low-down, planning, organization and versioning of this work, as well as implementation and documentation of the procedure and circumstances of collecting routes,substance and documents and attracting personal sources and obtaining information from these sources, their generalized assessment and use as evidence in making an accusatory or acquittal or other final decision. It is substantiated, that the limits of proof in criminal or any other type of proceedings should indicate the level of internal conviction of the investigator, prosecutor, lawyer or judge, formed on the basis of a generalized assessment of all relevant, reliable and benign evidence available in the case, establishment of an objective truth in the case and the need to make an accusatory or acquittal or other final decision on the basis of only such truth