Submitted by PPG Ci?ncias Criminais (ppgccrim@pucrs.br) on 2018-04-18T20:50:41Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
Disserta??o Carolina Final Homologa??o.pdf: 1868291 bytes, checksum: 884b20071fc17fcaf6ce2bc73dfc3320 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Caroline Xavier (caroline.xavier@pucrs.br) on 2018-05-07T13:46:56Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
Disserta??o Carolina Final Homologa??o.pdf: 1868291 bytes, checksum: 884b20071fc17fcaf6ce2bc73dfc3320 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-05-07T13:50:27Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
Disserta??o Carolina Final Homologa??o.pdf: 1868291 bytes, checksum: 884b20071fc17fcaf6ce2bc73dfc3320 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2017-12-08 / Coordena??o de Aperfei?oamento de Pessoal de N?vel Superior - CAPES / The present work is grounded on Penal System and Violence area, in the line of
research on Contemporary Criminal Justice Systems of the Postgraduate Program in Criminal
Sciences of PUCRS, and aims at analyzing the probative issue concerning the judge?s
decision to pursue, when it allows sufficient evidence to justify, in overcoming the dubio pro
reo, by the dubio pro societate. It is assumed a constitutional view of Brazilian criminal
procedure of the principles studied, by the filter of the presumption of innocence guarantee in
criminal proceedings. The problem under discussion is the principle of presumption of
innocence and its scope of observance within Brazilian criminal proceedings, as well as the
adage of the in dubio pro societate, in order to allow a deeper evidentiary dilemma contained
in the judge?s decision to pursue, that is, whether sufficient evidence has the force to
overcome the presumption of innocence in face of a pro-societal judgment, or not, in a
criminal justice system, which is claimed to be democratic. We also worked on the specific
differences between indication and evidence, as well as on differences between investigative
acts and evidence acts, with the purpose of fostering a separation between these precepts and
demarcating their moments of action within criminal prosecution. Finally, we presented and
analyzed documentary research data, identifying vices in speeches of judge?s decision to
pursue, which affirm a certain argument from authority contained in such documents, and
which may end up influencing the jurors? beliefs. We concluded that there is no democratic
criminal procedure without the actual observance of the principle of presumption of
innocence, which must be imposed at decisive moments, surpassing any other technical
principles colliding with it. / No presente trabalho, inserto na ?rea de concentra??o Sistema Penal e Viol?ncia e na
linha de pesquisa Sistemas Jur?dico-Penais Contempor?neos, do Programa de P?s Gradua??o
em Ci?ncias Criminais da PUCRS, buscou-se analisar, atrav?s de um olhar constitucional do
processo penal brasileiro, perpassando-se os institutos estudados, pelo filtro da garantia do
estado de inoc?ncia dos acusados em procedimento processual penal, a quest?o probat?ria
afeita ? decis?o de pron?ncia, quando esta permite uma fundamenta??o com a afirma??o de
ind?cios suficientes de autoria, em supera??o da d?vida pro reo, pela d?vida pro societate. O
problema posto em discuss?o se prop?s a trabalhar o princ?pio da presun??o de inoc?ncia e
seu alcance de observ?ncia dentro do processo penal p?trio, bem como o ad?gio do in dubio
pro societate, a fim de permitir um aprofundamento do dilema probat?rio contido na decis?o
de pron?ncia, qual seja, se ind?cios suficientes de autoria possuem for?a para superar a
presun??o de inoc?ncia em face de um julgamento pr?-sociedade, ou n?o, ante um processo
penal que se denomina democr?tico. Trabalhadas, ainda, as diferen?as pontuais entre ind?cios
e provas, e atos de investiga??o e atos de prova, com a finalidade de propiciar um afastamento
entre tais institutos e demarcar seus momentos de atua??o dentro da persecu??o penal. Ao
final, apresentados e analisados dados de pesquisa documental realizada, a qual identificou
v?cios em discursos exarados na decis?o de pron?ncia, os quais acabam por afirmar um certo
argumento de autoridade contido em tais documentos, e que podem acabar por influenciar os
jurados quando da forma??o de sua convic??o. A conclus?o ? qual se chegou foi a de que n?o
h? um processo penal democr?tico sem a real observ?ncia do principio da presun??o de
inoc?ncia, a qual deve se impor em momentos decis?rios, superados institutos t?cnicos que
colidem com a mesma.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:tede2.pucrs.br:tede/7990 |
| Date | 08 December 2017 |
| Creators | Stein, Ana Carolina Filippon |
| Contributors | Giacomolli, Nereu Jos? |
| Publisher | Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul, Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Ci?ncias Criminais, PUCRS, Brasil, Escola de Direito |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_RS, instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, instacron:PUC_RS |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | 3263773896050529173, 500, 500, 500, 600, 4512033976268881925, -7277407233034425144, 2075167498588264571 |
Page generated in 0.0017 seconds