Checking Interceptions and Audio Video Recordings by the Court after Referral
In any event, the prosecutor and the judiciary should pay particular attention to the risk of theirfalsification, which can be achieved by taking only parts of conversations or communications that took place in thepast and are declared to be registered recently, or by removing parts of conversations...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Danubius University
2012-05-01
|
| Series: | EIRP Proceedings |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.proceedings.univ-danubius.ro/index.php/eirp/article/view/1350/1192 |
| Summary: | In any event, the prosecutor and the judiciary should pay particular attention to the risk of theirfalsification, which can be achieved by taking only parts of conversations or communications that took place in thepast and are declared to be registered recently, or by removing parts of conversations or communications, or evenby the translation or removal of images. This is why the legislature provided an express provision for theirverification. Provisions of art. 916 Paragraph 1 Criminal Procedure Code offers the possibility of a technicalexpertise regarding the originality and continuity of the records, at the prosecutor's request, the parties or exofficio, where there are doubts about the correctness of the registration in whole or in part, especially if notsupported by all the evidence. Therefore, audio or video recordings serve themselves as evidence in criminalproceedings, if not appealed or confirmed by technical expertise, if there were doubts about their conformity withreality. In the event that there is lack of expertise from the authenticity of records, they will not be accepted asevidence in solving a criminal case, thus eliminating any probative value of the intercepted conversations andcommunications in that case, by applying article 64 Par. 2 Criminal Procedure Code. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2067-9211 2069-9344 |