version(redirected from bimanual version)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical.
(1) One of several different accounts or explanations of a fact or event.
(2) In investigatory and judicial activity, the supposition of an investigator or the court concerning the presence or absence of some of the events and facts that are important for the proper resolution of the case. This supposition is based on evidence and other factual materials of the concrete criminal case and constructed with regard to the experience of examining analogous cases. A version may also be a possible explanation of the origin and nature of events and facts important to the case. A version is a variety of hypothesis. Its specific character lies in the form in which it is verified. Verification is done by procedural means; that is, by means of verification and evaluation of evidence in forms established by the law of criminal procedure.
There are general and particular investigative and judicial versions. The general version concerns the subject of proof for the criminal case as a whole; in particular, it contains a supposition about the presence (or absence) of a criminal event and about the guilty parties. A particular version concerns individual aspects and elements of the subject of proof. It contains a supposition about various aspects of the event under study (for example, the motive, place, and time of a crime, the weapon involved, and so forth). The correlation between the general and the particular version in a criminal case reflects the objectively existing link between the whole, which the general version is supposed to explain, and the part of the whole, which is to be explained by the particular version.
In the investigatory process of a court examination concerning each of the elements (or facts) of the subject of proof of a criminal case or concerning the totality of these elements (facts), versions of an opposing nature may be advanced (for example, versions concerning the presence or absence of a criminal event, the presence or absence of circumstances aggravating guilt, and so forth). Such versions may be advanced by any participant in the criminal proceedings and, in the event of their substantiation, they are included by the investigator and court in the sphere of versions subject to verification. All versions in a case, regardless of who advanced them, must be verified comprehensively and objectively. The versions advanced in the process of preliminary and judicial investigation make it possible to determine what investigative or judicial actions and what order should be employed; that is, they make it possible to determine the general direction of proceedings in the case.
Judicial versions are organically linked to investigative versions, but they have their own specific characteristics. From the viewpoint of the court, the investigator’s conclusion about the guilt of the accused is only the version of the prosecution, which is subject to verification by the court in the context of a court examination. The specific nature of a judicial version lies in the fact that the court is not limited to the version of the prosecution; rather, it is also obliged to verify the counterversion—that is, the version directly opposed to that advanced by the prosecution. The court also verifies whether all versions that arise from the circumstances of the case and contradict the conclusions of the investigation have been fully examined—in particular, versions advanced by the accused or following from his testimony, versions contained in the petitions and statements of participants in the proceedings of the case, and so forth. In addition, the court verifies the corroboration of the evidence in the version on which the prosecution bases its case. Only the version that is objectively substantiated in the course of investigative and judicial verification and that completely excludes all other explanations acquires the character of an authentic explanation of the facts that make up the subject of proof.
S. G. NOVIKOV
grammatical category of the verb, which defines the relationship of an action to its subject or an indirect object (mainly the intended direction of an action). It occurs in the Caucasian languages (Kartvelian, Abkhas-Adygei), in Semitic, and apparently in certain Indo-European languages, as well as in several other languages. Subject, object, and neutral versions are differentiated in the Kartvelian languages: compare Georgian i-šenebs, he builds for himself; u-šenebs, he builds for him; a-šenebs he builds (in general). Further oppositions are also possible within the version category. In some languages there is no clear-cut distinction between version and voice.
REFERENCEShanidze, A. G. “Glagol’nye kategorii akta i kontakta na primerakh gruzinskogo iazyka.” Izv. AN SSSR: Otdelenie iazyka i literatury, 1946, vol. 5, issue 2.
Version numbers are useful so that the user can know if the program has changed (bugs have been fixed or new functions added) since he obtained his copy and the programmer can tell if a bug report relates to the current version. It is thus always important to state the version when reporting bugs. Statements about compatibility between different software components should always say which versions they apply to.
See change management.