graduate student from 01.01.2020 until now
Kaluga, Russian Federation
Obninsk, Russian Federation
UDK 15 Психология
GRNTI 15.81 Прикладная психология
OKSO 37.03.01 Психология
BBK 884 Психология отдельных видов деятельности. Отраслевая (прикладная) психология
TBK 83 Психология
BISAC PSY014000 Forensic Psychology
This article provides a theoretical analysis of the conditions and specifics of the consideration of criminal cases with the participation of jury. The aspect of the provision of psychological influence by the participants in the trial on the jury by means of a system of psychological techniques that form the prejudice of the jury against the defendant is disclosed. Currently, the selection of candidates for jurors does not include psychological evaluation criteria. But, in order to avoid making erroneous decisions by the jury, they need to be prepared to confrontation psychological pressure from opposite sides, to teach them the ability to resist manipulation. During the trial the defense and prosecution parties try to form the attitude of the jury towards the defendant, which corresponds to their position. The methods of forming the convictions of jurors correspond to the modern direction of applied psychology. The degree of awareness of the jury about the evidence examined and the rules for its assessment is a cognitive condition for overcoming the formation of the necessary conviction in the jury, because the defendant and the prosecutor and defense parties of the trial use manipulative techniques as methods of influence, mechanisms of covert control: deception, intimidation, etc. It is advisable, prior to participating in a trial, to give the jury the foundations of the psychological knowledge they need. At the same time, it is hardly realistic, in the existing normative conditions, to form their knowledge of the general laws of the functioning of mental processes, the characteristics of the individual’s activity and his personal characteristics that determine the productivity of the implementation of mental cognitive processes in the framework of a specific situation that has legal significance. But you can pay special attention to the emotional stability of the individual, aggressiveness, introversion, rigidity in the spheres of interpersonal relationships and the resolution of difficult situations of professional activity.
jury trial, polysubjective presentation, psychological impact, verdict, accusatory / acquittal psychological attitude
1. Tonkov V. E. Razvitie suda prisyazhnyh v Rossii: problemy i perspektivy // Pravo i gosudarstvo v sovremennom mire: sostoyanie, problemy, tendencii razvitiya : IV Mezhdunar. «Mal'cevskie chteniya» pamyati zasl. deyat. nauki Ros. Federacii, chl.-kor. RAN, d-ra yurid. nauk, prof. Mal'ceva Gennadiya Vasil'evicha : materialy Mezhdunar. nauch.-teoret. konf., Belgorod, 28 apr. 2017 g. / otv. red. M.V. Marhgeym. – Belgorod: OOO GiK, 2017. – S. 118–125.
2. Kalashnikova A. S., Levochkina N. S. Vnutrennie faktory, vliyayuschie na verdikt prisyazhnyh zasedateley [Elektronnyy resurs] // Psihologiya i pravo. – 2013. – Tom 3. – № 2. – URL: https:// psyjournals.ru/psyandlaw/2013/n2/61013.shtml (data obrascheniya: 20.01.2021).
3. Alekseevskaya E. N. Neustranimye oshibki s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley // Evraziyskaya advokatura. – 2016. – № 5 (24). – S. 32–35.
4. Gavrilenko A. A. Problemy izucheniya lichnosti podsudimogo v sudebnom razbiratel'stve s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. – 2011. – Vyp. 345. – S. 104–107.
5. Astaf'ev A. Yu. Ob'ektivnost' i bespristrastnost' naputstvennogo slova predsedatel'stvuyuschego v sude prisyazhnyh // Vestnik Voronezhskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Ser. «Pravo». – 2017. – № 3. – S. 263–273.
6. Belyaev M. V. Osobennosti resheniy, prinimaemyh sudom s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley // Ugolovnaya yusticiya. – 2018. – № 12. – S. 62–65.
7. Hatuaeva V. V., Avdeev M. A. Osobennosti formirovaniya voprosnogo lista i naputstvennogo slova predsedatel'stvuyuschego pri rassmotrenii ugolovnogo dela s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley (praktika Voronezhskogo oblastnogo suda) // Leningradskiy yuridicheskiy zhurnal. – 2016. – № 3. – S. 230–239.
8. Vladykina T. A. Psihologicheskie osobennosti realizacii principa sostyazatel'nosti storon v sude prisyazhnyh // Pravosudie i sudebnaya praktika. – 2012. – № 8. – S. 81–91.
9. Panferova A. N. K voprosu o znachimosti psihologicheskih znaniy v deyatel'nosti gosudarstvennogo obvinitelya v sude s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley // Pravoporyadok: istoriya, teoriya, praktika. – 2017. – № 4 (5). – S. 120–124.
10. Panin E. A. Takticheskie osobennosti deyatel'nosti zaschitnika po neytralizacii formirovaniya predubezhdeniya prisyazhnyh pri oglashenii otdel'nyh protokolov sledstvennyh deystviy // Vestnik Voronezhskogo instituta MVD Rossii. – 2007. – Vyp. 4. – S. 27–29.
11. Horosheva A. E. Novyy vzglyad na sistemu takticheskih priemov, ispol'zuemyh gosudarstvennym obvinitelem, v sudebnom razbiratel'stve s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley po ugolovnym delam po ubiystvam // Izvestiya Altayskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. – 2011. – № 2 (2). – S. 132–135.
12. Nasonov S. A. Zapret issledovaniya dokazatel'stv, sposobnyh vyzvat' predubezhdenie prisyazhnyh zasedateley v otnoshenii podsudimogo // Voprosy sovremennoy yurisprudencii. – 2014.– № 34. – S. 115–119.
13. Pichugin V. G. Problema psihologicheskogo vliyaniya na prisyazhnyh zasedateley // Fundamental'nye aspekty psihicheskogo zdorov'ya. – 2019. – № 1. – S. 159–162.
14. Alieskerov M. A., Engalychev V. F. Yuridicheskiy psiholog v grazhdanskom sudoproizvodstve: vozmozhnosti i funkcii // Arbitrazhnyy i grazhdanskiy process. – 2004. – № 3. – S. 21–26.
15. Ivanov N. A. Ocenka professional'nyh kachestv sudebnogo eksperta // Vestnik Omskogo yuridicheskogo instituta. – 2010. – № 2 (13). – S. 72–74.
16. Koryakovcev V. V. Osobennosti peresmotra resheniy suda s uchastiem prisyazhnyh zasedateley v apellyacionnoy instancii // Pravoprimenenie. – 2018. – T. 2. – № 3. – S. 117–134.
17. Alieskerov M. A., Engalychev V. F. O psihologicheskom obespechenii deyatel'nosti sudov // Rossiyskiy sud'ya. – 2004. – № 5. – C. 11–12.
