| LEADER |
03081//19a220022915:4500 |
| 001 |
1356855 |
| 024 |
|
|
|3 10.12816/0002691
|
| 044 |
|
|
|b المغرب
|
| 100 |
|
|
|a الصفو، نوفل علي عبدالله
|g Alsafou, Noufal Ali Abdullah
|e مؤلف
|q Alsafou, Noufal Ali Abdullah
|9 133279
|
| 245 |
|
|
|a دور أجهزة المراقبة الحديثة في الاثبات الجنائي
|
| 260 |
|
|
|b صلاح الدين دكداك
|c 2014
|g مارس
|
| 300 |
|
|
|a 6 - 53
|
| 336 |
|
|
|a بحوث ومقالات
|b Article
|
| 520 |
|
|
|b Proof is considered as one of the most important criminal law subjects and it is regarded as the most applicable one in practical life. It is a procedure work which aims to present the evidence before the specialized authorities in a tangible fact in order to prove accusation against the suspect or clear his side by means of using legislation means. There are three kinds of proof systems: the restricted, the ultimate and the mixed systems. The judge authority in accepting the evidence is influenced by the kind of proof system. Since the purpose of proof is to reach fact, the way to fulfill that is then using means that can suit the type of the crime. The means of proof is everything that is used to prove the fact. The use of the modern technical means has lead to a scientific revolution in the criminal proof field. There has been fear in the fact that using these means may lead to avoid the personal rights. In this study, we have researched in some of the commonly and used means in numerous countries. The means that have been used in this study are: he DNA, the palatal rugae, the eye print, the voice print, the radar and surveillance cameras. The importance of these modern means has surpassed all other means have been proved to be of high precision. The studies and the scientific experiments have proved the efficiency and the precision of these means which have almost reached to 97%. This percentage has added authenticity to these means that the court can rely on when issuing the judgment even if there is not any other evidence. These means are considered legitimate since they do not oppose any lawful principle, which demands rejecting them provided that conditions should be kept. The judge authority is restricted in estimating the scientific value of evidence in monitoring the legality of the procedure and does not extend to estimating the scientific value of evidence because these evidences are scientific consistent facts.
|
| 555 |
|
|
|a 798286
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a الإثبات الجنائي
|a قانون الإثبات
|a إجهزة المراقبة الإلكترونية
|a القوانين والتشريعات
|a المخالفات المرورية
|
| 700 |
|
|
|a خطاب، خالد عوني
|g Khatab, Khalid Awni
|e م. مشارك
|9 219608
|
| 773 |
|
|
|4 الفقه الإسلامي
|4 القانون
|6 Islamic Jurisprudence
|6 Law
|c 001
|l 017
|m ع 17
|o 0419
|s مجلة الفقه والقانون
|t Journal of Fiqh and Law
|v 000
|x 2336-0615
|
| 856 |
|
|
|u 0419-000-017-001.pdf
|
| 930 |
|
|
|d y
|p y
|q y
|
| 995 |
|
|
|a IslamicInfo
|
| 999 |
|
|
|c 488963
|d 488963
|
