Листопад, 2018 р. 17 interaction between the listed objects does not cause the formation of visible, severe injuries and traces. For example, with a small intensity of contact interaction between the car and the body of a pedestrian, the car may not remain markedly damaged and traces of such contact. In turn, in the presence of obvious signs of contact with the pedestrian in the car, the corresponding visible bodily injuries in the pedestrian may not be formed.It should also be taken into account that during one and the same accident there is not one but more participants. Some of them can get bodily injuries, someone is not. In any case, whatever the participant of the accident said about his absence of bodily injuries -he should be inspected by an expert and, therefore, is an independent object of expert investigation, regardless of whether he will be found bodily harm.Sometimes the fact of the presence of bodily injuries in one participant in an accident and the fact of absence in the secondthe most valuable differentiation and diagnostic criterion, which allows you to determine the location of these persons in the car. It also happens that there are no injuries to a participant in an accident, but nonetheless, on his clothes and shoes, the most valuable for expert diagnostics of injuries and traces are formed. All this should be taken into account by the experts.
Conclusions
1.A study of literary sources suggests that there is no universal concept of automobile injury at present. 2. Having the concept of automobile injury significantly different from each other, there are significant disadvantages, first of all, incompleteness.3. The study dictates the need to develop a modern concept of automobile injury, both for the needs of forensic doctors, and for experts in related fields of knowledge, primarily, experts -transport trusologists.
ОТНОСИТЕЛЬНО ПРОТИВОРЕЧИЙ В ОПРЕДЕЛЕНИИ ПОНЯТИЯ «АВТОМОБИЛЬНАЯ ТРАВМА»Гуров А.М., Голубович Л.Л., Козлов С.В.Резюме: В статье приведен подробный анализ судебно-медицинских литературных источников, на основании ко-торого следует прийти к выводу о том, что общепринятого понятия автомобильной травмы в данное время не существует, к тому же, любое из сформулированных определений автомобильной травмы страдает неполнотой. Авторы подчеркивают необходимость разработки универсального понятия автомобильной травмы, как для судебно-медицинских экспертов, так и для экспертов других отраслей знаний, прежде всего, экспертов -транспортных трасологов.Ключевые слова: судебно-медицинская экспертиза, автомобильная травма.Resume. Questions of application of laboratory methods of analysis in forensic-medical examination of modern traffic accidents (during the contact of moving vehicle with the pedestrian and injury of the driver and passengers inside the car) are developed in this article. Limitations of laboratory analysis organization, first of all of laboratory medical-criminalistic analysis of bone fragments and soft tissues with injuries, and laboratory analysis of clothes and shoes of the...
