A prova no processo penal

This paper analyzes the three components of the evidence operation: proof premises or evidence in the strict sense, with particular regard to the distinction between evidence declaration and critical/circumstantial evidence; the propositions to be proved, principal or incidental, final or intermediate; the act of proving, connoted by the rule of beyond all reasonable doubt. While the first two terms vary according to the procedural context, the third remains indefectible, since it is incongruous to consider any proposition to be 'proven' while there is a reasonable reason to doubt it. With regard to the distribution of the burden of proof, the structure of the case and its legal qualification, whether substantial or procedural, are decisive. Therefore, it is possible to identify, for each decision alternative, the term 'marked', which conveys the proposition to be proved, and the opposite 'consequential' term, which derives from the failure to reach the proof: for example, with respect to the main object in trial, the term 'marked' is the conviction, the term 'consequential' the acquittal.Lo scritto analizza le tre componenti dell’operazione probatoria: le premesse probatorie o prove in senso stretto, con particolare riguardo alla distinzione tra dichiarazioni di prova e prove critico- indiziarie; le proposizioni da provare, principali o incidentali, finali o intermedie; l’atto del provare, connotato dalla regola dell’oltre ogni ragionevole dubbio. Mentre i primi due termini variano in funzione del contesto processuale, il terzo resta indefettibile, essendo contraddittorio ritenere ‘provata’ una qualsiasi proposizione allorché vi sia un ragionevole motivo per dubitarne. Quanto alla ripartizione degli oneri probatori, determinante è la struttura della fattispecie, sostanziale o processuale. In base a questa è possibile individuare, per ogni alternativa decisoria, il termine ‘marcato’, che veicola la proposizione da provare, e l’opposto termine ‘consequenziale’, che deriva dal mancato raggiungimento della prova: ad esempio, rispetto al tema principale del processo, termine ‘marcato’ è la condanna, termine ‘consequenziale’ il proscioglimento.Este artigo analisa os três elementos da operação probatória: a premissa probatória ou prova em sentido estrito, com especial atenção à distinção entre declarações probatórias e prova crítica-indiciária; as proposições a serem provadas, principais ou incidentais, finais ou intermediárias; o ato de provar, definido pela regra de “além da dúvida razoávelâ€. Enquanto os dois primeiros variam de acordo com o contexto processual, o terceiro permanece inalterado, uma vez que é contraditório considerar qualquer proposição "comprovada" enquanto houver uma razão razoável para duvidar disso. No que diz respeito à distribuição do ônus da prova, é determinante a estrutura do tipo legal, seja substancial ou processual. Com base nisso, é possível identificar, para cada alternativa decisória, o elemento "marcado", que transmite a proposição a ser provada e o elemento "consequencial" oposto, derivado da falha na comprovação: por exemplo, em relação ao objeto principal em julgamento, o elemento "marcado" é a condenação, e o elemento "consequencial" é a absolvição

Use of an Elastomeric Knee Brace in Patellofemoral Pain Syndrome: Short-Term Results

Purpose This article verifies the effectiveness of a new brace on patellofemoral pain syndrome (PFPS) in adjunct to a specifically developed rehabilitation program. Methods Two groups of 30 patients with PFPS were prospectively and randomly allocated to a rehabilitation protocol, with (group A) or without (group B) the use of a specific brace. All the patients were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months using the disease specific Kujala scale and a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain; time to return to sport and patient satisfaction with the brace were also recorded. Results Kujala scale’s values showed constant and progressive improvement. The mean score at 6 months was 79.8 � 6.8 points in group A and 76.8 � 8.6 in group B, rising at 12 months to 80.9 � 7.5 in group A and 78.4 � 8.3 in group B. VAS scores significantly differed (p < 0.05) between the two groups at both 6 and 12 months; the score recorded at 12months was 0.9 � 1.3 in the brace-treated group and 1.8 � 1.6 in the controls. The patients who used a brace showed a quicker return to sports and 75% of the patients in this group were satisfied. Conclusion All the scores improved progressively in both groups. The most significant improvement concerned pain, showing that the brace used in this study may allow a better subjective outcome and a quicker return to sport. Level of Evidence Level 2, prospective randomized controlled trial

Measurement of melatonin in body fluids: Standards, protocols and procedures

Abstract: The circadian rhythm of melatonin in saliva or plasma, or of the melatonin metabolite 6‐ sulphatoxymelatonin in urine, is a defining feature of suprachiasmatic nucleus function, the endogenous oscillatory pacemaker. These measurements are useful to evaluate problems related to the onset or offset of sleep and for assessing phase delays or advances of rhythms in entrained individuals. Additionally, they have become an important tool for psychiatric diagnosis, its use being recommended for phase typing in patients suffering from sleep and mood disorders. Thus, the development of sensitive and selective methods for the precise detection of melatonin in tissues and fluids of animals emerges as necessary. Due to its low concentration and the co‐existence of many other endogenous compounds in blood, the determination of melatonin has been an analytical challenge. This review discusses current methodologies employed for detection and quantification of melatonin in biological fluids and tissues