Indictment: approximate content, characteristics, features

If the accusatory speech is the main tool of the prosecutor, then they need to learn how to use it correctly. To do this, you need to know all the features of speech, the main characteristics. But even more important is the content in which all aspects of the case should be displayed.

The concept

What is called an accusatory speech? The term refers to the speech of a private or public prosecutor, with the help of which he proves in court that the defendant is guilty of a crime.

This is not the only definition of indictment. Quite detailed definitions are found in the literature, including not only the meaning, but also the content of the speech. As a rule, each concept has its own meaning, and both of these terms should not be intertwined.

Value

The prosecutor’s indictment is directly related to participation in the hearing. The specialist proves the guilt of the defendant and supports the prosecution. Based on this, we can name the following significance of the prosecutor's speech:

1. In the indictment, the prosecutor summarizes the results of both the preliminary investigation and the trial. In addition, the specialist evaluates his activities and summarizes with regards to the achievement of goals. The prosecutor takes the floor and accuses the defendant only if his guilt has been proven and the preliminary investigation was successful.
2. The indictment is the crown of all the activities of the prosecutor. The specialist also, using speech, asks the court to punish the defendant and convict him. It is in the last statement that the prosecutor can clarify the legal grounds and the wording of the charge. This is due to the fact that during the trial there is a likelihood of new circumstances.
3. The prosecutor in his speech substantiates the charge, explains the whole chain of evidence confirming the guilt of the defendant. Using these techniques, the specialist tries to arouse the judge's guilt of the person. After all, it is through this conviction that the right decision is made.
4. With the help of a monologue, the prosecutor educates not only those in the courtroom, but the public as a whole. The prosecutor’s speech is aimed at showing the inevitability of punishment and the triumph of justice and law.

It is important that the prosecutor's accusatory speech comply with certain requirements, otherwise its value is diminished.

Conditions

What are the requirements for such a speech? There are not many of them, but each one should be discussed in detail:

1. Argumentation. Every word has to be proven. This applies not only to the issue of guilt, but also to the characteristics of the individual, the qualifications of his actions, the reasons for committing crimes and other things. It turns out that the prosecutor must prove the guilt of the defendant. If he does not, the defendant will be found not guilty. Apart from the prosecutor, none of the participants in the trial can prove the guilt of a person, as well as be responsible for the acquittal. Since the trial has an adversarial nature, particular importance is given to the well-reasonedness of the indictment in the case. If the prosecutor’s speech contains understatement, inaccuracies, then the court has the right to pronounce an acquittal or commute the sentence. This is because the court is guided by the presumption of innocence, and the inability to prove a particular moment is always interpreted in favor of the defense of the accused.
2. Objectivity. An indictment in a case must be spiced up with objective arguments. It turns out that both requirements are closely interconnected, but again, not all arguments brought by the prosecutor are objective. To achieve objectivity, all aspects of both evidence of guilt and evidence of innocence must be taken into account. The prosecutor cannot distort evidence, keep silent about unfavorable facts. The prosecutor cannot, at any cost, seek confession, ignore inconsistencies, because he must be as objective and impartial as the judge.
3. Concreteness and content. The indictment in the court should be based precisely on these requirements. The prosecutor must clearly speak about the circumstances of the crime, the actions in which the person is charged. If the defense can juggle with general phrases, then the prosecutor cannot afford it. Only a detailed analysis of the evidence and a consistent presentation of the facts is the basis of the prosecutor's speech.
4. Ethics and morality. The speech of the prosecutor should not be annoyed, show personal hostility to the accused. The prosecutor must prove the guilt of the person, and not humiliate and demonstrate a negative attitude towards him. Otherwise, prosecutors may be dismissed. No one canceled the sense of proportion and tact, even in relation to the one who, it would seem, deserves it.

Content

If you look at examples of indictment, you can see how much it depends on the identity of the prosecutor. But, nevertheless, the content of speech is also regulated, albeit not verbatim, but there are guidelines.

First of all, the prosecutor must analyze the crime, state the political assessment, the personal characteristics of the defendant, the reasons for the crime, and much more. It seems that because of all the points, speech becomes stereotyped, but it should not be so. The speaker himself must choose the sequence of arguments, the content of the monologue, and he should be guided by the goals that he ultimately wants to achieve.

It is the guilt of the defendant that is the main component of the indictment. Based on this, the prosecutor must build his entire monologue.

In which case is the guilt of a person no longer in doubt? If all the evidence strongly indicates this. Moreover, it is important that not only the legal, but also the actual side of the crime is covered.

To prove the corpus delicti, it is necessary to substantiate the allegations according to which the accused committed an act. It is also necessary to prove that the act committed is a danger to society, and therefore the law prohibits and punishes it. It does not matter whether the act was committed through negligence or intentionally, the punishment will still follow.

The prosecutor cannot build the prosecution on the testimony of witnesses. Such examples of indictment only prove the fact of committing a crime, but not to blame. First of all, the prosecutor must rely on evidence that specifically indicates the guilt of the person. The act of forensic medical research, the protocol of a search or inspection of the scene of an incident is not a reinforced concrete argument. In all cases, a fact is established that, in conjunction with others, proves guilt, but not independently. It turns out that the task of the prosecutor is to prove this connection by analyzing the evidence, and not just listing them. If this is not done, then it may turn out that an indictment in court will more likely justify a person than prove his guilt.

What is the difference between a good prosecutor and a bad one? A good accuser is someone who can build convincing speech. A bad prosecutor does not know how to analyze evidence, draw parallels, draw the right conclusions from known facts.

What do they expect from the prosecutor?

We have already said that angry indictment is unacceptable. What then awaits the judge from the prosecutor if there is no direct evidence of guilt? Here is what a specialist should pay attention to:

1. Motive. The prosecutor must clearly state the motive according to which the defendant committed an act.
2. Lack of motive from other participants. If the prosecutor proves that other people had no motive to commit a crime, then the guilt will be almost obvious.
3. When it comes to theft or murder, the prosecutor must prove that the victim has no motive for the crime.
4. Falsity or veracity of witness testimony.

It turns out that the prosecutor is obliged to justify every thesis that he uses in his speech. Of course, it is much easier to make the right speech if the evidence of the crime is direct, but not always so lucky.

There is another way to build a prosecution speech - a refutation of the accused’s alibi or justification for voluntary guilty pleas. There are cases when, in justifying the guilt of one defendant, the prosecutor proves the innocence of another.

It turns out that the prosecutor can choose any strategy, the main thing is that the goal of the prosecutor’s indictment in court be achieved.

What is this speech

In addition to the fact that the prosecutor should convince the judge of the guilt of the defendant with his speech, the monologue should not be deprived of a certain grace.

The prosecutor’s accusatory speech is a genre of eloquence, which means that the prosecutor must possess oratory, rhetorical skills. All this is achieved through a lot of work on yourself and continuous improvement.

Although the accusatory speech is a genre of eloquence, this does not mean that the prosecutor can give free rein to his feelings and emotions. No matter what the defendant is (a pleasant person or a person who has committed a mild or serious crime), the prosecutor cannot cross the line and express a personal attitude towards the person. The prosecutor must control himself, otherwise he will simply be removed from a specific case, because he thereby shows his lack of professionalism.

The principle of constructing a speech

There are a lot of examples of the prosecutor’s indictment, and if you look at them, you can see that all the monologues are built according to one scheme.

So, let's look at the algorithm:

1. Introductory part. The prosecutor begins his monologue and prepares the participants in the case to the point.
2. Statement of factual circumstances of the act. There is no place for fantasy or speculation. The dry facts are stated.
3. Evaluation and analysis of evidence collected. Here the prosecutor can demonstrate all his professionalism and clearly analyze all the evidence.
4. Giving personal characteristics of both the accused and the victim. At this stage, it would be worthwhile to recall the ethics of the prosecutor’s indictment. It is forbidden to insult, show neglect and in any other way detract from the dignity and honor of the participants in the process.
5. Justification of the sane qualification of the act. Based on all the known information, the prosecutor asks the court for a particular punishment. At the same time, it is important that this request be reasoned.
6. Thoughts on punishment. The paragraph is very similar to the previous one, but nevertheless there are differences. The prosecutor may express his assumptions in accordance with the qualification of the crime. For example, if a person has committed a mild crime, the prosecutor does not have the right to demand the death penalty from a judge.
7. Answers to questions regarding compensation for property damage. The sample indictment, of course, is not a guide to action, and the sequence of the monologue may vary, but the points themselves must be observed. Why is this issue considered last? The reason is simple - the amount of material damage can be estimated only after qualifying the act and evaluating all the evidence of guilt.
8. Analysis of the conditions and causes that contributed to the commission of the crime, options for their elimination. This is more of an educational moment than an element of inquiry. In some cases, prosecutors simply omit it, drawing a conclusion to their monologue.

As you can see, the structure of the indictment is very complicated, but it helps to illuminate the situation from all sides and make the right decision.

Of course, the prosecutor cannot decide the fate of people himself, but a correctly constructed speech will allow the judge to make an objective decision.

Receptions

The prosecutor’s accusatory sample is good because it makes it easy for professionals to build a monologue. But, besides him, there are still certain tricks that allow the prosecutor to arouse interest in his words, attract the participants in the meeting, get into psychological contact with them, gain their trust and, finally, prepare the participants psychologically for the main part of the monologue.

Here are the tricks:

1. Explain the features of the proceedings. This is especially true of the charges, which are built only on indirect evidence.
2. Assess the danger of crime to society, as well as characterize the lawsuit and the significance of the crime to society.
3. Quoting a moral or philosophical source in which an act is sharply condemned.
4. Briefly outline the picture of the crime, thereby facilitating the transition to the main part.
5. To give an example of a presentation on a group case or process with many episodes.

What questions should the prosecutor answer

The accusatory and defensive speech is built on different principles. For example, the defense during the debriefing answers some questions, and the prosecutor must give answers to diametrically opposite ones.

These are the questions:

1. Is the fact of the act of which the person is accused proved?
2. Is it proved that the defendant committed the act?
3. Is an act a crime, according to which article and paragraph of the Criminal Code of our country is classified?
4. Is the defendant guilty of a crime?
5. Should the defendant be punished for a crime?
6. Are there any aggravating or mitigating circumstances?
7. What punishment should be assigned to the defendant? The court shall award punishment for each crime separately, if there have been several of them. In the case when there are several defendants, the court makes a decision for each of them.
8. Is it possible not to impose a sentence or to remove a sentence?

At the end of the speech, the prosecutor must inform the judges that his position is correct and objective. He also sums up not only in essence, but also moral.

The conclusion should be stated clearly, while it is necessary to cause the strongest emotions possible among the participants in the process.

Preparation procedure

Do I need to pre-compose a speech? Opinions were divided on this point.

Some insist that a pre-written speech is not needed, because a good prosecutor can conduct an analysis of the process and evidence along the way. It is much worse if the prosecutor reproduces the memorized text, which is little similar to the results of the process.

Other court officials are strongly advised to write speeches, especially in complex cases. This position is argued by the fact that not every person is able to improvise and, most importantly, to convince the public of his innocence, not being prepared. According to these experts, only having thoroughly worked on a monologue, one can count on people to feel it.

What can be said about this situation? It all depends on the person who holds the position of prosecutor. Someone is able to remember all the nuances of the case and keep them in mind until the end of the process, while another will not have enough memory, but maybe even the qualifications or experience of eloquence.

Based on this, you can prepare for speech as follows:

1. Write theses of a monologue.
2. Sketch a whole speech.
3. Make a written speech plan.

Alternatively, you can draw up a mental plan, but it works only in simple matters. After all, if the case is replete with nuances, any ambiguities, it will be difficult to keep all the information in your head.

Note that there is a special preparation of the speech for the trial with the participation of the jury.

Jury trial

What is so special about this trial? But the fact is that the prosecutor has an even greater responsibility, because he must convey his arguments not only to the judge, but also to the jury.

If the indictment is convincing and based on direct evidence, then the outcome of the proceedings is likely to be true.

At the same time, the prosecutor must separate the issues of law, which are decided by the presiding judge, and the issues of fact, discussed by the rest of the jury. There are many important nuances hidden here. For example, the prosecutor can give a personal description of the defendant only to the extent necessary to establish certain signs of an offense. At the same time, one should not cite the previous conviction of the accused as an argument or recognize the defendant as a chronic drug addict or alcoholic. Why such restrictions? The fact is that such evidence can cause a biased attitude of jurors to a person.

But, on the other hand, these points can be mentioned in the proceedings, but in a form that would allow them to be related to issues of fact, not law.

Psychology Features

In this section, we will focus on the psychological features of such a monologue.

So what does the prosecutor want to achieve? :

1. . , . , .
2. . , .
3. . , , , .
4. . , (, , ), .
5. . , .
6. . . , .

, :

1. .
2. , .
3. .

, , .

, , . .

Conclusion

Now it’s clear what the indictment is and why it is important. In conclusion, it is worth paying attention to the behavior of the prosecutor.

The prosecutor is a very important and necessary profession. This person helps to punish criminals and does not prevent the punishment of the innocent. But sometimes it happens that the prosecutor overestimates his own significance and begins to incorrectly fulfill his duties. Of course, such cases are few, but they are.

To avoid this, remember the honor of the uniform and do not stoop to juggling evidence or accusations without reason. And the point is not so much in dishonesty as in the fact that innocent people may suffer because of such actions. Just imagine, a person will spend several years in prison for what he did not commit. This is really terrible.

During an indictment, one must remember ethics. We have already discussed this above. You can not degrade the dignity of the defendant, make diagnoses, insult a person, no matter what crime he commits. Such behavior is fraught not only with removal from the proceedings, but also with dismissal from the organs.

A good prosecutor acts within the law and will never allow himself to be biased towards someone. Sometimes they lose their nerves, but you need to control yourself in order to achieve results and establish yourself as a real specialist.