| Question 1: I think the control of the test can not be cured by the statement of the expert, so can not join by reading the results . Question 2: I think in principle the least must be presumed that the new realization of it implies a re-victimization. I do not think that can be measured in a kind of balance, and thus see whether to go unpunished or that the victim go back to that situation pareec not be presumed because it could regulate agradable.Digo contemplating different situations, such as case in which the victims are at trial seniors and voluntarily choose Psar through that again. But again, in principle, should not be able repetirse.Pregunta 3: the question is difficult, firstly because of the recognition of the victim not as a mere tetsigo fact but as the injured party and subject d eerchos, I think you should always listen. Perhaps it is unconstitutional to force her to go through it, the worse I do not think that the results of this measure are the product of an unconstitutional measure, it's actually an expert and so must take it. Loi implies that it is a sign and I see no reason for his inconstitucionalidad.si if there are minors, their parents together with your child's counselor / r foster ensure their rights. and if the victim is an adult may decide whether to agree to submit to the meido of prueba.4: sentence in my opinion is null, since it was taken as irreproducible evidence should have been given an opportunity to the accused to be presente.LAMENTABLEMENTE MAYBE WHEN THE ONLY WAY TO TEST A SEXUAL CRIME MUST BE THE CHAMBER GESELL go unpunished in the interest of protecting the victim. I think that's recognized place of DEERCHO.EL SUBJECT OF PROBLEM IS NOT SO ENE, AS MANY TIMES BUT THIS IS THE ONLY TEST. KGA |
| |
0 comments:
Post a Comment