The subject. The subject of the study is the relationship between the methodology of the theory of forensic science and law enforcement issues. The nature of the forensic science and the paradigms of theory are subject to significant changes today. Philosophical and scientific postulates revealed differences in post-non-classical science. The author substantiates the need for the evolution of some essential criteria of scientific knowledge in forensic science. The article deals with the concepts of private forensic theories and the structure of the general theory of forensics. It shows the impact of scientific research on the needs of practice, the ambiguous nature of the preparation of practical recommendations, the complex path from basic forensic research to the integration of investigative methods in investigative practice.The purpose of the article is to confirm or disprove the hypothesis that changing the general forensic paradigms should lead to changes in the method of detecting and using traces of crimes in criminal proceedings.The methodology of the research includes analysis, synthesis, deduction as well as private scientific methods of forensics, in particular, the doctrine of traces. The main results of the research. Any scientific research, especially in the field of forensics, is aimed at solving practical problems if they are unsolvable by existing methods and recommendations. Sometimes the problem, especially at the initial stage of its study, is difficult to be identified clearly. First of all, you need to prove that it exists, then define it in general, and only then look for approaches, methods of scientific research of its causes and essence, and concentrate on finding a solution. In forensic science, this is expressed in the identification of inefficiency in solving the problems of investigating crimes using existing scientific recommendations. One of the essential elements of private forensic theories is their practical implementation. Practical orientation in forensics implies the availability of knowledge that is potentially suitable for the development of practical recommendations on methods, techniques for detecting traces of crime and related events, means of collecting evidence, the possibilities of using the extracted and processed information for the purposes of criminal proceedings. The relevance of the results is determined by the significance of the scientifically proven tasks, questions and problems. For investigative practice, it is not the status of theoretical recommendations that is important, but their qualitative content.

Conclusions. Relevance in practice does not always determine the scientific significance of theoretical research in forensic science. The fundamental nature of scientific knowledge and overcoming outdated paradigms require time and at a certain stage may not be in demand in practice. However, changes in scientific views are strategically necessary for law enforcement and should be reflected in recommendations for forensic practitioners.