The article analyzes the situation that has developed in modern science in connection with the competition of two theories explaining the formation of criminal procedural evidence. Analyzing advantages and disadvantages of these theories, the authors make a conclusion on reasonableness and value of the investigative approach of taking evidence. The principal argument in favor of this theory is the fact that gives a right explanation to the modern technology of criminal procedural proofs, established in the legislation of nowadays. And more importantly, this theory corresponds to the current state legal model of Russia as a sovereign, independent State. The leading positions of the analyzed theory are enumerated in the article. The investigator is the subject of the formation of evidence.Theinvestigative steps or other procedural activities carried out by the investigator in cooperation with other participants of the investigation are the way to form evidences. The content of investigative actions may be the results of searching activities. The process of forming evidence is completed at the stage of thepreliminary investigation. According to the authors’ opinion the drawing of the report of the investigative action is the final step of the formation of an usual investigative evidence. The authors of the article find possible reformation or disbanding of the investigative evidence as a result of influence of the arguments of the defense during the trial.

The article presents the results of the analysis of the problems of regional investment in terms of determining the volume of investment costs in capital construction projects. The purpose of the study is to determine the relationship of the state's pricing policy in the construction industry to the process of allocating investments for the construction of infrastructure facilities in the regional context. The signs of uneven possibilities of budgets of different regions are highlighted. Pricing factors for construction products, in particular, due to the regulatory framework, are identified as local reasons for differences in capabilities. The types of construction objects with characteristic qualities for carrying out such an analysis are determined. Research methods are based on a piecemeal comparison of linear models of direct costs and cost conversion indices in territorial standards. Differentiation of state pricing standards is considered on the example of special types of work in the construction of urban infrastructure facilities. The estimation of the difference in the cost indicators of territorial standards is used in the assessment of the investment potential of the region. The results obtained show a multiple difference in the cost of construction resources in neighboring regions without proper justification. This makes it possible to determine the volume and cost parameters of construction projects, the creation of which is possible within the framework of the current regional budget. The proposed three-dimensional model of the timing, cost and risks of the project provides grounds for calculating the qualitative indicator when choosing objects of investment programs of the regions. It is concluded that there is a need to move from a system of loosely interconnected territorial and sectoral budget and regulatory bases to a unified information environment.

The modern russian doctrine of criminal procedural evidence includes a ban on the use of the results of operational investigative activities in proving. It is based on the ideology of the investigator as a subject of proving objective truth. The investigator is authorized by means of investigative actions to turn the results of operational investigative activities into means of proving the truth. In the accusatory criminal procedure system, information and materials received by both parties are transformed into a means of proving the truth only after cross-checking. As the Italian experience shows, the transition from the investigative system to the accusatory criminal procedure system and the adversarial technology of proving the judicial truth is inevitable in the context of building a rule of law and democracy.