Framgångsfaktorer vid utredning av misshandelsbrott
(2010) JURM01 20092Department of Law
- Abstract
- During 2005 a study was carried out which concluded in that the police should be able to solve many assault and battery cases where the parties are unknown to each other and where the crime took place outdoors. RPS gave thereafter Brå the task to carry out a new study which basically had the same objective as the one that was carried out in 2005. Brå:s results of these studies has been published in Report 2007:12 and 2009:1. In the latter the conclusion was taken that personal clarification should be raised amongst other things through that the police account for more preliminary investigation protocols without the supporting evidence to a prosecutor. The Conclusion that Brå arrived at was based on chosen crime investigations where the... (More)
- During 2005 a study was carried out which concluded in that the police should be able to solve many assault and battery cases where the parties are unknown to each other and where the crime took place outdoors. RPS gave thereafter Brå the task to carry out a new study which basically had the same objective as the one that was carried out in 2005. Brå:s results of these studies has been published in Report 2007:12 and 2009:1. In the latter the conclusion was taken that personal clarification should be raised amongst other things through that the police account for more preliminary investigation protocols without the supporting evidence to a prosecutor. The Conclusion that Brå arrived at was based on chosen crime investigations where the prosecutor sued or judged that it would be possible to sue.
In order to be able to check Brå:s claim I decided to carry out a study that was based on several sentences analysed by court views on supporting evidence. To make sure that the sentence was not changed at a later stage I analysed law enforced sentences in the Appeal court where the defendant was found guilty. Of those sentences which are included in the study, it becomes clear that there was no support for Brå:s opinion of the support evidence. It should be noted that the Supreme Court, after Brå published their report in two editions, confirmed the value of the support evidence. My opinion is that the study supports the findings that Brå:s report 2009.1 is out of date.
The study’s aim was also from the sentences to identify general success factors to solve more cases. The most important identified factor is that police patrols take comprehensive first hand actions in close connection to the committed crime which focuses on injury documentation and inquiries with parties and witnesses. Another important factor is that the police, at the crime scene, document the observations being made and their impressions. (Less) - Abstract (Swedish)
- Under 2005 genomfördes en studie vars slutsats bl. a. var att polisen borde kunna klara upp fler misshandelsbrott där parterna är obekanta med varandra och där brottet skett utomhus. RPS gav därefter Brå i uppdrag att genomföra en ny studie som i stort sett hade samma syfte som den från 2005. Brå:s resultat av studierna har redovisats i Rapport 2007:12 och 2009:1. I den senare dras slutsatsen att personuppklaringen skulle kunna öka genom att polisen redovisar fler förundersökningsprotokoll utan stödbevisning till åklagare. Slutsatsen som Brå kom fram till baserades på utvalda brottsutredningar där åklagare väckt åtal eller bedömt att det skulle vara möjligt att väcka åtal.
För att kontrollera Brå:s påstående om stödbevisning valde jag... (More) - Under 2005 genomfördes en studie vars slutsats bl. a. var att polisen borde kunna klara upp fler misshandelsbrott där parterna är obekanta med varandra och där brottet skett utomhus. RPS gav därefter Brå i uppdrag att genomföra en ny studie som i stort sett hade samma syfte som den från 2005. Brå:s resultat av studierna har redovisats i Rapport 2007:12 och 2009:1. I den senare dras slutsatsen att personuppklaringen skulle kunna öka genom att polisen redovisar fler förundersökningsprotokoll utan stödbevisning till åklagare. Slutsatsen som Brå kom fram till baserades på utvalda brottsutredningar där åklagare väckt åtal eller bedömt att det skulle vara möjligt att väcka åtal.
För att kontrollera Brå:s påstående om stödbevisning valde jag att genomföra en studie där jag utifrån ett antal domar analyserade domstolens syn på bevisningen. För att förvissa mig om att inte domen ändrats vid senare tillfälle analyserades lagakraftvunna domar i Hovrätten där de tilltalade fällts till ansvar. Av de domar som ingår i studien återfinns inget stöd för Brå:s uppfattning om stödbevisning. Efter det att Brå publicerat sin rapport har Högsta Domstolen i två avgöranden slagit fast vikten av stödbevisning. Min uppfattning är att studien ger stöd för påståendet att Brå:s rapport 2009:1 är ovederhäftig vad avser uppfattningen om stödbevisning.
Studien syftade även till att utifrån domarna identifiera generella framgångsfaktorer för att klara upp fler brott. Den viktigaste faktorn som identifierades är att polispatruller vidtar långtgående förstahandsåtgärder i nära anslutning till att brottet förövas som fokuserar på skadedokumentation och förhör med parter och vittnen. En annan viktig faktor är att polismännen som kommer till brottsplatsen noggrant dokumenterar de iakttagelser som görs och egna intryck. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/1600033
- author
- Aspinge, Caroline
- supervisor
- organization
- course
- JURM01 20092
- year
- 2010
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Straffrätt
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 1600033
- date added to LUP
- 2010-05-06 15:52:41
- date last changed
- 2010-05-06 15:52:41
@misc{1600033,
abstract = {{During 2005 a study was carried out which concluded in that the police should be able to solve many assault and battery cases where the parties are unknown to each other and where the crime took place outdoors. RPS gave thereafter Brå the task to carry out a new study which basically had the same objective as the one that was carried out in 2005. Brå:s results of these studies has been published in Report 2007:12 and 2009:1. In the latter the conclusion was taken that personal clarification should be raised amongst other things through that the police account for more preliminary investigation protocols without the supporting evidence to a prosecutor. The Conclusion that Brå arrived at was based on chosen crime investigations where the prosecutor sued or judged that it would be possible to sue.
In order to be able to check Brå:s claim I decided to carry out a study that was based on several sentences analysed by court views on supporting evidence. To make sure that the sentence was not changed at a later stage I analysed law enforced sentences in the Appeal court where the defendant was found guilty. Of those sentences which are included in the study, it becomes clear that there was no support for Brå:s opinion of the support evidence. It should be noted that the Supreme Court, after Brå published their report in two editions, confirmed the value of the support evidence. My opinion is that the study supports the findings that Brå:s report 2009.1 is out of date.
The study’s aim was also from the sentences to identify general success factors to solve more cases. The most important identified factor is that police patrols take comprehensive first hand actions in close connection to the committed crime which focuses on injury documentation and inquiries with parties and witnesses. Another important factor is that the police, at the crime scene, document the observations being made and their impressions.}},
author = {{Aspinge, Caroline}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Framgångsfaktorer vid utredning av misshandelsbrott}},
year = {{2010}},
}