The aim of this thesis is to represent in detail one of the fundamental principles of the Czech criminal procedure, the principle of free evaluation of evidence. At first the thesis deals with theoretical aspects of this principle, since they are almost unavailable in the modern literature. The author afterwards analyses the extensive judicature of Czech courts (including the Constitutional court) related to general issues of evaluation of evidence as well as to particular means of proof. The thesis also contains proposals of legislative changes, as the legal regulation of criminal procedure seems to be no longer satisfactory.

Univ., Habil.-Schr.--Innsbruck, 2006. / Literaturverz. S. [193] - 201.

Thesis (M.S.)--Ohio University, August, 2007. / Title from PDF t.p. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.J.S.)--University of Nevada, Reno, 2006. / "May 2006." Includes bibliographical references (leaves 170-174). Online version available on the World Wide Web. Library also has microfilm. Ann Arbor, Mich. : ProQuest Information and Learning Company, [2006]. 1 microfilm reel ; 35 mm.

Thesis (D.Jur.Sc.)--University of Melbourne, Dept. of Law, 2000. / Typescript (photocopy). Includes bibliographical references (leaves 309-321).

Univ., Diss.--Göttingen, 2004. / Literaturverz. S. 309 - 327.

Thesis (D.Jur.Sc.)--University of Melbourne, Faculty of Law, 1999. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 309-321). Also available online at the University of Melbourne ePrint Repository.

Inadmissibility of Evidence in Criminal Proceedings Abstract The main goal of this work is to find out exactly how the conditions of admissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings are determined by law. This issue is explained in detail not only in the so-called Rath Case, where there was a conflict of views on the requirements of the application for spatial interception, specifically in the decisions of the High Court in Prague of October 17, 2016, file no. 6 To 106/2015 and the Supreme Court of June 7, 2017, File no. 6 Tz 3/2017-I.-693. First, the work deals with individual means of evidence and their possible defects, which may result in their inadmissibility at the court. Subsequently, the author explains the differences between the concepts of ineffectiveness, inadmissibility and illegality of evidence, which is defined only by legal science, but which are essential for understanding the issue of admissibility of evidence and possible correction of inconsistencies in the Czech legal system. It also offers insight into the issue of absolute and relative ineffectiveness of evidence and then deals with the American Doctrine of Fruit from the Poisoned Tree and the views of Czech experts in the field of law on this doctrine, or other methods of assessing secondary evidence. A comparative part is added,...

Little is known about the variation in digital forensics practice in the United States as adopted by large local police agencies. This study investigated how environmental constraints, contextual factors, organizational complexity, and organizational control relate to the adoption of digital forensics practice. This study integrated 3 theoretical perspectives in organizational studies to guide the analysis of the relations: institutional theory, contingency theory, and adoption-of-innovation theory. Institutional theory was used to analyze the impact of environmental constraints on the adoption of innovation, and contingency theory was used to examine the impacts of organizational control on the adoption of innovation. Adoption of innovation theory was employed to describe the degree to which digital forensics practice has been adopted by large municipal police agencies having 100 or more sworn police officers. The data set was assembled primarily by using Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) 2003 and 1999. Dr. Edward Maguire`s survey was used to obtain 1 variable. The joining up of the data set to construct the sample resulted in 345 large local police agencies. The descriptive results on the degree of adoption of digital forensics practice indicate that 37.7% of large local police agencies have dedicated personnel to address digital evidence, 32.8% of police agencies address digital evidence but do not have dedicated personnel, and only 24.3% of police agencies have a specialized unit with full-time personnel to address digital evidence. About 5% of local police agencies do nothing to address digital evidence in any circumstance. These descriptive statistics indicate that digital evidence is a matter of concern for most large local police agencies and that they respond to varying degrees to digital evidence at iv the organizational level. Agencies that have not adopted digital forensics practice are in the minority. The structural equation model was used to test the hypothesized relations, easing the rigorous analysis of relations between latent constructs and several indicator variables. Environmental constraints have the largest impact on the adoption of innovation, exerting a positive influence. No statistically significant relation was found between organizational control and adoption of digital forensic practice. Contextual factors (task scope and personnel size) positively influence the adoption of digital forensics. Structural control factors, including administrative weight and formalization, have no significant influence on the adoption of innovation. The conclusions of the study are as follows. Police agencies adopt digital forensics practice primarily by relying on environmental constraints. Police agencies exposed to higher environmental constraints are more frequently expected to adopt digital forensics practice. Because organizational control of police agencies is not significantly related to digital forensics practice adoption, police agencies do not take their organizational control extensively into consideration when they consider adopting digital forensics practice. The positive influence of task scope and size on digital forensics practice adoption was expected. The extent of task scope and the number of personnel indicate a higher capacity for police agencies to adopt digital forensics practice. Administrative weight and formalization do not influence the adoption of digital forensics practice. Therefore, structural control and coordination are not important for large local police agencies to adopt digital forensics practice. v The results of the study indicate that the adoption of digital forensics practice is based primarily on environmental constraints. Therefore, more drastic impacts on digital forensics practice should be expected from local police agencies’ environments than from internal organizational factors. Researchers investigating the influence of various factors on the adoption of digital forensics practice should further examine environmental variables. The unexpected results concerning the impact of administrative weight and formalization should be researched with broader considerations.

Thesis (LLM)--University of Stellenbosch, 2005. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The law regarding the admissibility of unconstitutionally obtained evidence for impeaching the accused's testimony is still undeveloped. This work discusses three of the options available to South African courts and the difficulties inherent in each. The first is to follow the approach of the Supreme Court of the United States. The American approach regarding the exclusion of evidence from the case in chief is strict. Courts are not bestowed with a discretion to admit unconstitutionally obtained evidence: Unless one of the accepted exceptions exist, a court must exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence in order to deter unconstitutional behaviour by the authorities. Deterrence of unconstitutional police behaviour is however no longer considered controlling when cross-examining the accused. Unconstitutionally obtained evidence - both real and testimonial communications - is therefore admissible for impeachment purposes despite being excluded from the case in chief. The rationale is to prevent the accused giving perjurious testimony in the face of the prosecution's inability to impeach the accused's veracity in the usual manner. The application of the American approach in South Africa has however already been rejected in S v Makhathini.1 The second possibility is for South African courts to follow the position of the Supreme Court of Canada in R v Calder.2 The admissibility of impeachment evidence in Canada - as with evidence in chief - is based on the effect of its admission of the repute of the administration of justice. However, evidence excluded from the case in chief will only in very rare circumstances be admitted in cross-examination of the accused. Finally, the option suggested by this thesis, is to continue the trend started by s 35(5) of the South African Constitution, which has already been applied with great success in cases where the admissibility of unconstitutionally obtained evidence in the case in chief is in issue. Section 35(5), like the Canadian s 24(2) it bears some resemblance to, gives courts a discretion to exclude unconstitutionally obtained evidence on the basis of unfairness to the accused or the effect admission will have on the administration of justice. It is submitted in this thesis that, because of the interlocutory nature of a ruling on admissibility, this approach adapts easily to the admission of limited purpose evidence such as impeachment evidence: If the admission of the unconstitutionally obtained evidence, regardless of whether it was previously excluded from the case in chief, renders the trial unfair or would otherwise be detrimental to the administration of justice it must be excluded. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die reg in verband met die toelaatbaarheid van ongrondwetlik verkree getuienis vir 'n geloofwaardigheidsaanval op die beskuldigde is nog in 'n vroee stadium van ontwikkeling. Hierdie tesis bespreek drie moontlikhede beskikbaar aan Suid-Afrikaanse howe en die probleme inherent aan elkeen. Die eerste is om die posisie van die Amerikaanse Hooggeregshof te volg. Die Amerikaanse posisie betreffende die toelaatbaarheid van getuienis tydens die staat se saak is streng. Howe het geen diskresie om ongrondwetlik verkree getuienis toe te laat nie: Behalwe in gevalle waar aanvaarde uitsonderings bestaan, moet 'n hof dus ongrondwetlik verkree getuienis uitsluit om ongrondwetlike optrede deur die owerhede te voorkom. Voorkoming van ongrondwetlike optrede aan die kant van die polisie is egter nie meer die beherende oorweging wanneer die beskuldigde in kruis-ondervraging geneem word nie. Ongrondwetlik verkree getuienins - beide reel en verklarend van aard - is gevolglik toelaatbaar vir doeleindes van 'n geloofwaardigheidsaanval, ten spyte daarvan dat dit moontlik ontoelaatbaar was tydens die staat se saak. Die rede is om te voorkom dat die beskuldigde meinedige getuienis lewer terwyl die staat verhoed word om the bekuldigde se geloofwaardigheid op die gewone manier te toets. Hierdie posisie is egter al verwerp in S v Makhathini. 3 Die tweede moontlikheid is om die posisie soos uitgele deur die Hooggeregshof van Kanada, in R v Calder 4 te volg. In Kanada word die toelaatbaarheid van getuienis rakende geloofwaardigheid - sowel as getuienis rakende skuld - bepaal deur die invloed wat die toelating daarvan op die reputasie van die regspleging het. Getuienis wat ontoelaatbaar is tydens die staat se saak sal egter slegs in baie beperkte omstandighed toegalaat word tydens kruisondervraging van die beskuldigde. Laastens, die opsie wat voorgestel word deur hierdie tesis, is om voort te gaan met die patroon wat ontwikkel is deur art. 35(5) van die Grondwet van Suid-Afrika, wat alreeds met groot sukses toegepas is in sake waar die toelaatbaarheid van ongrondwetlik verkree getuienis in die staat se saak ter sprake was. Artikel 35(5), soos Kanada se art 24(2) waarmee dit tot 'n mate ooreenstem, gee howe 'n diskresie om ongrondwetlik verkree getuienis uit te sluit op grond van onregverdigheid teenoor die beskuldigde of indien die toelating daarvan 'n negatiewe invloed op die regspleging sal he. Omdat 'n beslissing oor die toelaatbaarheid van getuienis tussenstyds van aard is, pas dit goed aan by die verdere ondersoek na die toelaatbaarheid van getuienis wat slegs VIr 'n beperkte doel aangebied word: Indien die toelating van ongrondwetlik verkree getuienis, ongeag of dit voorheen uitgesluit was uit die staat se saak, die verhoor onregverdig maak of die regspleging negatiefbeinvloed, moet sulke getuienis uitgesluit word.