{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01291248206599713, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.172566371681416, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Psychological features of falsehood as a method of coercion of testifying

Falsehood is recognized as an integral part of human communications, a unique phenomenon of social reality and socio-cultural traditions. The Criminal Code of the Russian Federation does not specify the concept of the sign “other illegal actions” as a way of committing coercion to testify, and this concept is not disclosed in criminal proceedings either. An overly broad interpretation of this feature found in scientific literature makes it difficult to correctly apply the norms of the Criminal Law. In this regard, the article examines the psychological signs of deception and the possibility of recognizing it as one of the methods of coercion to testify. Based on the psychological and legal analysis of the materials of the judicial and investigative practice, it was concluded that deception cannot be related to other illegal acts of forcing to give evidence, since this method of pressure from the interrogator always allows the interrogated to think over the proposals put forward and make a conscious choice, that is, when deceiving, there is no effect on the freedom of expression of the will of the defendant. In the event that information is received that the interrogators are receiving confessions using deception, the issue of bringing these persons to disciplinary responsibility should be resolved.