PERSPECTIVES OF THE USE OF DERMATOGLIPS OF MIDDLE AND PROXIMAL FALANTS OF THE FUNCTIONS OF THE HAND IN REPRODUCTION OF EXTERNAL-RECOGNITION SIGNS OF UNCERTAINTED PERSON

Резюме: В статье проведен обзор литературных источников, на основе анализа которых обозначены перспективы использования дерматоглифических параметров средних и проксимальных фаланг пальцев рук в прогнозировании внешне опознавательных признаков человека, учитывая перспективы расширения реестра идентифицирующих критериев. Ключевые слова: дерматоглифика, дерматоглифические параметры, идентификация личности.

3. Проведене дослідження диктує необхідність розробки сучасного поняття автомобільної травми, як для потреби судових медиків, так і для експертів суміжних галузей знань, насамперед, експертів -транспортних трасологів.  Resume: to the article the detailed analysis of medico-legal literary sources, on the basis of that it follows to reach to the conclusion that the generally accepted concept of motor-car trauma does not exist on this time, is driven, besides, any set forth determination of motorcar trauma suffers incompleteness. Authors underline the necessity of development of universal concept of motor-car trauma, both for medico-legal experts and for the experts of other areas of knowledge, first of all, experts -transport tracers. Keywords: medico-legal examination, motor-car trauma.

IN RELATION TO CONTRADICTIONS IN DETERMINATION
Introduction. An automobile injury has long occupied an important place in the theory and practice of forensic medicine; This section of forensic medicine is devoted to many scientific works. But, as the analysis of various literary sources shows, there is currently no single, commonly accepted forensic definition of the concept of «automobile injury».
This situation needs to be corrected. Accordingly, the purpose of this study is to analyze scientific sources devoted to the definition of the concept of automobile injury, the formulation of identified deficiencies in defining this concept.
Material and methods of research. The material of this study is literary sources that cover the problems of forensic medical examination of car injuries, their study with the definition of the completeness and validity of various forensic concepts of this type of injury.
Results of the research and their discussion. The literature data studied by us cover the following notions of «automobile injury». AA Solokhin formulates this concept: «In forensic medicine, an injury should be understood as the damage or complex of damage caused by external or internal parts of the moving car or other mechanized non-powered vehicles (including the trolleybus), as well as damage , which arise when the victims fall out of them (1. p.15).
AA Matushev says that «Under the car accident should be understood the bodily injury caused by the external or internal parts of the moving car, as well as the damage that arose when falling from the moving car» (2.c.10).
According to him, «It is not necessary to refer here to different poisonings (gas vapors, exhaust gases, etc.), drowning, burns, injuries caused by parts of a car standing (door cabin, etc.) (3.c.12) . AI Mukhanov regards autotrauma as follows: «Autotrauma is a combination of mechanical actions on the human body of a motor vehicle moving, associated with their actions of other objects and injuries occurring.» (4th Article 291). AP Zagryarskaya on this issue gives a more general definition, referring to the transport, and not only the automobile, injury: «In forensic medicine, a traffic injury should be understood as the mechanical damage received by a person from the action of external and internal parts of the moving vehicle, or falling from a transport that is also moving «(5.s.3). VG Naumenko, GK Gersamia formulated the following notion of autotrauma: «Under an automobile injury is understood the damage caused by a pedestrian, a driver or a passenger in connection with the movement of vehicles (car, bus, trolley bus) (6.st.229).
And such authors as V.L. Popov, R.V. Babakhanyan, GI Zaslavsky give the following definition: «Automobile injury -a set of injuries arising from drivers, passengers and pedestrians as a result of motor transport events» (7.st.181). According to these sources, there is no single understanding of the term «automobile trauma» today. Thus, some authors limit the concept of automobile injury only to the effect on the body of the external or internal parts of the car, here also refer to the fall of the moving car. Other authors, for example, AI Mukhanov, understand this concept more fully, emphasizing that in the course of an accident on the body of the victim may, in addition to the car, influence other objects. A quoted above A.V. Popov, R.V. Babakhanyan, G.I. Zaslavsky refers to an automobile injury in general, all injuries occurring in the victim during the entire road traffic accident.
As can be seen from the foregoing, it is impossible to speak of the universality and completeness of the concepts suggested by the authors of an automobile injury. Thus, the overwhelming majority of authors who characterize an automobile injury, understand under it only mechanical damage to the bodies of the victims.
The effect of other factors, although it is directly related to road accidents, namely, thermal, chemical and other factors, they do not refer to an automobile injury. Such approaches raise great doubt, as the effects of these factors and the corresponding damage are directly related to the road accident. It should be assumed that it is natural to subject them to expert examination along with mechanical damage. For example, as a result of an accident, the car got mechanical damage and burned. In the study of dead bodies, mechanical damage, burns, and signs of action of toxic combustion products have been detected. If act according to the logic of the authors who suggest to understand only the mechanical injury only mechanical damage, then only they in this case should be attributed to an automobile injury. The issue of burns and the effects of toxic combustion products remains open, despite the fact that it is entirely clear that both these and the second, along with mechanical damage, are directly related to the road accident. Moreover, signs of action of these factors are studied within the same examination, the same forensic expert, the data on the effect of these factors are included in one expert's conclusion. Therefore, the above position of dear colleagues causes, to put it mildly, misunderstanding.
It may be noted that in order to prevent the artificial and unnecessary contraction of the concept of automobile injury, it is necessary to develop and propose a concept that would cover not only the mechanism of causing mechanical injuries to the victims as a result of an accident, but would also take into account the impact on the body of the victims and all possible other injuries factors.
However, the need to formulate the modern forensic concept of automobile injury is only part of a major problem. The reason for this is that in our time, none of the competent experts solely on the basis of the nature of bodily injuries in the victims does not sum up about such circumstances as the kind of precise mechanism of contact interaction between the car and the body of the victim, the location of the victim in the car at the time Road accident, etc. A competent expert, along with the study of bodily injuries in the victims, will analyze and other data -the results of the study of clothing and footwear results of expert investigation of the car, review of the place of the event (the last two sources of evidence are usually studied with the participation of transport trusologists). Meanwhile, in the current definitions of automobile injury, it is only about bodily injury, and other objects (primarily clothing and footwear, as a «standard» for a forensic investigator) are not even mentioned.
Meanwhile, the most reliable data on the circumstances of the injuries suffered in the course of an accident are obtained as a result of the joint work of experts from various fields of knowledge -forensicists, forensic doctors, transport trusologists, and others.
That is why there is an urgent need to formulate not only the narrow, exclusively forensic concept of automobile injury, but also more extensive (first of all, forensic and transport-traslogological).
It can be argued that such a concept, although out of the reach of the generally accepted forensic medical notions of automobile injuries, to a much greater extent corresponds to the needs of expert practice.
Therefore, it should be assumed that the synthesis of available scientific data and the comprehensive consideration of the problems of transport trauma will make it possible to formulate a universal for the experts of various fields of knowledge of the concept of automobile injury, which should take into account factors such as complex processes, primarily mechanical contact interaction between the human body, his clothes and footwear, parts of the moving car, resulting in bodily injuries, injuries and traces on clothing and footwear and the corresponding parts of the car.
It should be noted that even after the successful formulation of such a universal concept of automobile injury, it will nevertheless not be exhaustive, because the specific type and specific circumstances of the accident will always be individual features (for example, in the mutual contact, in addition to the listed objects, can enter also the objects that are in the victim's part of the road surface, the details of other vehicles, which leads to the formation of appropriate damage and traces on these objects, and on the bodies of victims in the course of an accident I can not only mechanical, but other factors -thermal, chemical, etc.).
Within the framework of this work, it is considered necessary to make some observations regarding possible non-standard situations in an accident. Yes, we must take into account that in practice there are situations where the process of contact 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.