Advanced

Tidigare förhör som bevis i brottmål

Lööf, Isak LU (2019) JURM02 20191
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats behandlar tidigare förhör som bevis i brottmål och undersöker frågan om när tidigare förhör får föredras som bevis i domstol, tidigare förhörs upptagningsformer och om man kan lita på att de är korrekta samt bevisvärderingen av tidigare förhör.

Vittnen, målsägande och tilltalade i brottmål behöver i Sverige som huvudregel framträda personligen för muntliga förhör i domstol. I rättegångsbalken stadgas däremot undantag för när upptagna tidigare förhör istället får föredras som bevis. Dessa undantagna situationer är följande. När en förhörsperson berättar något som avviker från vad som berättats i ett tidigare förhör, om en förhörsperson inte vill eller kan yttra sig om något och vissa fall där en förhörsperson är... (More)
Denna uppsats behandlar tidigare förhör som bevis i brottmål och undersöker frågan om när tidigare förhör får föredras som bevis i domstol, tidigare förhörs upptagningsformer och om man kan lita på att de är korrekta samt bevisvärderingen av tidigare förhör.

Vittnen, målsägande och tilltalade i brottmål behöver i Sverige som huvudregel framträda personligen för muntliga förhör i domstol. I rättegångsbalken stadgas däremot undantag för när upptagna tidigare förhör istället får föredras som bevis. Dessa undantagna situationer är följande. När en förhörsperson berättar något som avviker från vad som berättats i ett tidigare förhör, om en förhörsperson inte vill eller kan yttra sig om något och vissa fall där en förhörsperson är frånvarande i rätten.

Gällande frågan om tidigare förhörs föredragande uppmärksammas Europakonventionens artikel 6 som handlar om rätten till en rättvis rättegång. I denna rättighet innefattas den tilltalades rätt till motförhör av förhörspersoner som är åberopade av åklagaren. I praxis från Europadomstolen och Högsta domstolen har denna rättighet i konventionen uppmärksammats i fall med tidigare förhör som föredras på grund av att en förhörsperson inte vill eller kan yttra sig eller när en förhörsperson inte är närvarande. Europadomstolen har ansett att dessa tidigare förhör inte är förenliga med rätten till motförhör i fall där förhören är den avgörande bevisningen. I svensk rätt enligt Högsta domstolen har det ansetts att tidigare förhör inte får föredras som bevis i situationer där de omfattas av Europadomstolens praxis. I uppsatsen undersöks frågan om förbudet aktualiseras som ett förbud för åklagaren att föredra beviset eller om det faktiskt handlar om ett förbud för domstolen att värdera bevisningen i bevisvärderingen.

Gällande tidigare förhörs upptagning och huruvida de är korrekta eller inte identifieras i uppsatsen genom fyra olika upptagningsformer. Skriftliga förhör och inspelade förhör. Där det för skriftliga förhör upptagna av polisen finns konceptförhör, som utgör en sammanfattande text av vad som berättades och förhör i dialogform, som utgör en bokstavlig transkribering av allt som sades i förhöret. För inspelade förhör finns dessa i form av inspelningar med ljud och bild samt inspelningar med endast ljud. Uppsatsen kommer fram till att tidigare förhör i konceptform är de som har allra högst risk för att inte ha upptagits korrekt enligt språklig forskning. Denna uppfattning stöds av praxis och juridisk litteratur. De andra upptagningsformerna anses ha marginella risker för att inte ha upptagits korrekt. Av dessa anses inspelade förhör ha allra minst risk.

I bevisvärderingen av tidigare förhör belyser uppsatsen de faktorer som är specifika för tidigare förhör och som kan påverka i bevisvärderingen av dessa. Här särskiljs de situationer där tidigare förhör kan agera som hjälpfaktum till stöd för bevisvärderingen av muntliga förhör i rätten och situationer där tidigare förhör värderas som enskilda bevisfaktum. Uppsatsen framhäver i denna del psykologiska faktorer kopplade till tidigare förhör. Forskning från minnespsykologi visar att människors minne förändras över tid och att berättelser från tidigare förhör därför i många fall kan utgöra bättre bevis än berättelser från förhör under huvudförhandlingen. Uppsatsen behandlar även psykologiska effekter som forskning påvisat till följd av tidigare förhörs presentationsformer. Det utreds att presentationen av tidigare förhör i formen av uppspelning av video, uppspelning av bandinspelning och uppläsning av skriftlig text kan påverka domares trovärdighetsbedömningar och förmåga att avslöja lögner jämfört med bedömningen av förhör ’’live’’ i rätten. Det tas även upp psykologiska studier som visat att bedömare av tidigare förhör kan ha förutfattade meningar om de olika presentationsformerna som innebär att de har en uppfattning om att lögner lättare kan avslöjas eller att personer framstår som mer trovärdiga etc. när förhörspersoner framträder ’’live’’ jämfört med när förhör presenteras genom video, ljud eller skrift.

Uppsatsen avslutas med en analys där en metod presenteras för hur tidigare förhör som bevis ska bedömas. Metoden formuleras utifrån de tre frågeställningar som behandlats i uppsatsen. När tidigare förhör kan förebringas som bevis, om man kan försäkra sig att tidigare förhör är korrekt upptagna samt till sist bevisvärderingen av tidigare förhör. Metoden förespråkar att tidigare förhör bedöms utifrån ovan uppställda ordning på grund av att frågorna påverkar varandra i nedstigande led. Om frågan om tidigare förhör tillåts förebringas besvaras nekande blir beviset som helhet inte tillåtet. Svaret på frågan om man kan försäkra sig att ett tidigare förhör är korrekt upptaget påverkar i sin tur följande steg, bevisvärderingen. (Less)
Abstract
This thesis examines the use of previous questionings as evidence in criminal trials and explores when previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence in trial, the form of how previous questionings are recorded and if you can trust in their correctness as well as the evidence evaluation of previous questionings.

In criminal trials in Sweden; witnesses, injured parties and defendants must as a general rule appear personally when examinations of them are conducted in court. The Swedish code of judicial procedure does however contain certain exceptions for when previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence instead. The situations for when exceptions are allowed are as follows. When during an examination the... (More)
This thesis examines the use of previous questionings as evidence in criminal trials and explores when previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence in trial, the form of how previous questionings are recorded and if you can trust in their correctness as well as the evidence evaluation of previous questionings.

In criminal trials in Sweden; witnesses, injured parties and defendants must as a general rule appear personally when examinations of them are conducted in court. The Swedish code of judicial procedure does however contain certain exceptions for when previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence instead. The situations for when exceptions are allowed are as follows. When during an examination the examined person tells something which deviates from what was told before in a previous questioning, if during an examination the examined person does not wish to tell or cannot tell of something and in certain cases when a person that was to be examined is not present in court.

Concerning the allowance of previous questionings as evidence, attention is directed towards the right to fair trial as given by article 6 in the European Convention on Human Rights. This right includes the right of the defendant to cross-examine witnesses brought against him or her by the prosecution. In the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the swedish Supreme Court, this right to cross-examination has been discussed in cases where previous questionings has been presented because the examined person does not wish to tell or cannot tell of something or when the person is not present. The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that previous questionings as evidence in these situations is not compatible with the right to cross-examination in cases where the previous questioning constitute the decisive evidence. According to the Swedish Supreme Court, previous questionings are not allowed to be presented as evidence in the cases where they are covered by the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. The thesis examines if the prohibition of previous questionings as evidence in these situations constitutes a prohibition for the prosecution to present the evidence or if the prohibition constitutes that the court is not allowed to evaluate the evidence.
When it comes to the recording of previous questionings and if they are correct or not the thesis identifies four different forms of recording. There are previous questionings recorded through writing and questionings recorded through video or audio. For the written previous questionings conducted by the police there exists a form called concept-questionings, which are summarizations of what was said during the questioning. The other form of written questionings are called dialogue-questionings, which consists of a word for word transcription of everything said during the questioning. The other forms of previous questionings are recordings with sound and image and recordings with only sound. The thesis found that previous questionings recorded in the form of written concept-questionings have the highest risk of not having been recorded correctly, this according to linguistic research. This opinion is supported by case law and legal literature. The other forms of recording are regarded as having marginal risks of not having been correctly recorded. Of these, recordings in audio or video are considered to carry the least risk.

Concerning the evaluation of previous questionings as evidence the thesis highlights factors specific to previous questionings and which has the ability to affect in the evidence evaluation of these. It is also brought to attention the differentiation of situations where previous questionings can act as assisting facts to the evidence evaluation of examinations conducted in person in trials and situations where previous questionings act as and are evaluated as independent evidentiary facts. In this section of the thesis, psychological factors related to previous questionings are introduced. Research from memory psychology shows that human memory changes over time and that statements made in previous questionings therefore in many cases can be considered better evidence than statements made in examinations during a trial. The thesis also deals with psychological effects that research has shown which is related to the form of presentation of previous questionings. The research indicates that the presenting of previous questionings in the form of video recordings being played, audio recordings being played and recitals of written text can impact on judges assessment of trustworthiness and ability to reveal lies as compared to the assessment of examinations conducted ’’live’’ in court. Other psychological studies are also brought up which show that assessors of previous questionings can possess preconceived notions about the different presentation forms, notions such as that lies are more easily revealed or that persons appear as more trustworthy etc. when persons appear ’’live’’ in examinations compared to when persons statements from previous questionings are presented through video, audio or written text.

The thesis concludes with an analysis where a method for assessing previous questionings as evidence is presented. The method is formulated from the three issues dealt with in the thesis. When previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence, if you can be certain that previous questions are recorded correctly and finally the evidence evaluation of previous questionings. The method promotes the idea that the assessment of previous questionings should be approached in the above structured order. This is because the issues affect each other in a downwards linear fashion. If the question of whether a previous questioning is allowed to be presented as evidence is answered negatively, the evidence as a whole is not allowed. The answer to the question of if you can be certain that a previous questioning is correctly recorded affects the following step, the evidence evaluation. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Lööf, Isak LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Previous questionings as evidence in criminal trials
course
JURM02 20191
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
allmän rättslära, jurisprudence, straffrätt, criminal law, bevisrätt, evidence law, bevisvärdering, processrätt
language
Swedish
id
8977353
date added to LUP
2019-06-12 15:19:46
date last changed
2019-06-12 15:19:46
@misc{8977353,
  abstract     = {This thesis examines the use of previous questionings as evidence in criminal trials and explores when previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence in trial, the form of how previous questionings are recorded and if you can trust in their correctness as well as the evidence evaluation of previous questionings. 

In criminal trials in Sweden; witnesses, injured parties and defendants must as a general rule appear personally when examinations of them are conducted in court. The Swedish code of judicial procedure does however contain certain exceptions for when previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence instead. The situations for when exceptions are allowed are as follows. When during an examination the examined person tells something which deviates from what was told before in a previous questioning, if during an examination the examined person does not wish to tell or cannot tell of something and in certain cases when a person that was to be examined is not present in court. 

Concerning the allowance of previous questionings as evidence, attention is directed towards the right to fair trial as given by article 6 in the European Convention on Human Rights. This right includes the right of the defendant to cross-examine witnesses brought against him or her by the prosecution. In the case law of the European Court of Human Rights and the swedish Supreme Court, this right to cross-examination has been discussed in cases where previous questionings has been presented because the examined person does not wish to tell or cannot tell of something or when the person is not present. The European Court of Human Rights has ruled that previous questionings as evidence in these situations is not compatible with the right to cross-examination in cases where the previous questioning constitute the decisive evidence. According to the Swedish Supreme Court, previous questionings are not allowed to be presented as evidence in the cases where they are covered by the rulings of the European Court of Human Rights. The thesis examines if the prohibition of previous questionings as evidence in these situations constitutes a prohibition for the prosecution to present the evidence or if the prohibition constitutes that the court is not allowed to evaluate the evidence. 
When it comes to the recording of previous questionings and if they are correct or not the thesis identifies four different forms of recording. There are previous questionings recorded through writing and questionings recorded through video or audio. For the written previous questionings conducted by the police there exists a form called concept-questionings, which are summarizations of what was said during the questioning. The other form of written questionings are called dialogue-questionings, which consists of a word for word transcription of everything said during the questioning. The other forms of previous questionings are recordings with sound and image and recordings with only sound. The thesis found that previous questionings recorded in the form of written concept-questionings have the highest risk of not having been recorded correctly, this according to linguistic research. This opinion is supported by case law and legal literature. The other forms of recording are regarded as having marginal risks of not having been correctly recorded. Of these, recordings in audio or video are considered to carry the least risk. 

Concerning the evaluation of previous questionings as evidence the thesis highlights factors specific to previous questionings and which has the ability to affect in the evidence evaluation of these. It is also brought to attention the differentiation of situations where previous questionings can act as assisting facts to the evidence evaluation of examinations conducted in person in trials and situations where previous questionings act as and are evaluated as independent evidentiary facts. In this section of the thesis, psychological factors related to previous questionings are introduced. Research from memory psychology shows that human memory changes over time and that statements made in previous questionings therefore in many cases can be considered better evidence than statements made in examinations during a trial. The thesis also deals with psychological effects that research has shown which is related to the form of presentation of previous questionings. The research indicates that the presenting of previous questionings in the form of video recordings being played, audio recordings being played and recitals of written text can impact on judges assessment of trustworthiness and ability to reveal lies as compared to the assessment of examinations conducted ’’live’’ in court. Other psychological studies are also brought up which show that assessors of previous questionings can possess preconceived notions about the different presentation forms, notions such as that lies are more easily revealed or that persons appear as more trustworthy etc. when persons appear ’’live’’ in examinations compared to when persons statements from previous questionings are presented through video, audio or written text. 

The thesis concludes with an analysis where a method for assessing previous questionings as evidence is presented. The method is formulated from the three issues dealt with in the thesis. When previous questionings are allowed to be presented as evidence, if you can be certain that previous questions are recorded correctly and finally the evidence evaluation of previous questionings. The method promotes the idea that the assessment of previous questionings should be approached in the above structured order. This is because the issues affect each other in a downwards linear fashion. If the question of whether a previous questioning is allowed to be presented as evidence is answered negatively, the evidence as a whole is not allowed. The answer to the question of if you can be certain that a previous questioning is correctly recorded affects the following step, the evidence evaluation.},
  author       = {Lööf, Isak},
  keyword      = {allmän rättslära,jurisprudence,straffrätt,criminal law,bevisrätt,evidence law,bevisvärdering,processrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Tidigare förhör som bevis i brottmål},
  year         = {2019},
}