El estándar probatorio en la medida de aseguramiento: un análisis a partir de la Ley 1826 de 2017
Criminal proceedings are often designed to elucidate the truth behind a crime scene. However, the truth has always been subjective, contextual and cultural, it will depend on the degree of conviction of the means of proof and the biases of the procedural parties that construct those means and those...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Idioma: | Castellano |
| Publicado: |
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=8761891 |
| Fuente: | Derecho Penal y Criminología, ISSN 2346-2108, Vol. 44, Nº. 116, 2023, pags. 95-115 |
| Etiquetas: |
Añadir etiqueta
Sin etiquetas: Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro
|
| Sumario: |
Criminal proceedings are often designed to elucidate the truth behind a crime scene. However, the truth has always been subjective, contextual and cultural, it will depend on the degree of conviction of the means of proof and the biases of the procedural parties that construct those means and those facts. Therefore, if we assume that the truth is relative, criminal proceedings should reorient their screening of proof construction. That is why, trial techniques and standard of proof have been presented as the tools of the new century. In particu-lar, the standard of proof has materialized as thresholds that demand a certain level of evidentiary conviction that relates the criminal act with the participation of the accused. However, these standards with the new procedural regulation of 1826 of 2017 Act have been altered, especially those related to the imposition of the pre-trial detention. |
|---|