Struktural bevisning - En studie i hanteringen av struktural bevisning och ett klarläggande av bevisningen i förhållande till olika bevisvärderingsmetoder
Sammanfattning: The thesis Structural evidence consists of three parts of which the first part discusses structural evidence and other types of evidence. Structural evidence is a type of evidence consisting of synergetic circumstantial evidence, in other words consisting of circumstances that impossibly could prove the crime by itself but which together, conditionally, proofs the crime despite the missing relation between the theme of proof and the evidence. Since the evidence consists of collateral circumstances it cannot be related to the theme of proof that requires proofing of the criminal act itself. The second part of the thesis discusses different methods for evaluation of evidence and their stands on structural evidence. Bevisvärdemetoden is not applicable on structural evidence since this method requires a relation between the evidence and the theme of proof. Bevistemametoden requests the likeliness of the theme of proof depending on every circumstance presented as evidence in the case and is therefore applicable on structural evidence. Hypotesmetoden seeks alternative theories to the circumstantial evidence; the method is therefore well suited for structural evidence. The search for alternative theories makes it possible to discover other explanations to the present circumstances that have been invoked as evidence. The final part of the thesis discusses three different court cases in which the evidence constitutes of structural evidence concerning motive. The court always investigates and takes stand to claims of motive. Proofing of motive does not provide guidance regarding the perpetrator nor does it ensure conviction. However, in most cases it does provide a strengthening effect on other evidence. An effect that varies depending on the circumstances in the structural evidence.
HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)