Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
CRIMINOLOGY 3.1 EXAMINE INFORMATION FOR VALIDITY VERIFIED 2025 VERIFIED DOCUMENT
Typology: Exams
1 / 7
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
The prosecution and defense will present evidence in a criminal trial and it is up to the jury or magistrates to decide how valid that evidence is in reaching their verdict.
Before proceeding with a prosecution the cps requires evidence to be:
The fact the prosecution's evidence in court has to first convince the cps gives some indication that it may be valid, but this is not guaranteed for example the defense may be able to demonstrate shortcomings or inconsistencies in a witness’s testimony during cross-examination.
Eyewitness testimony
Although juties tend to give a lot of weight to eyewitness testimony it is not always valid. Many convictions based on evidence from eyewitnesses have been overturned when more accurate and reliable evidence has come to light such as DNA. Research by psychologists such as loftus et al shows that witnesses memory and the evidence can be affected by many things:
This all suggests that eye witness evidence may lack validity, if the event took place a long time before the trial the information lacks currency and recall becomes less accurate over time. Likewise the circumstances in which the memory is formed can undermine validity, for example loftus et al found that where a weapon was involved ‘weapon focus’ by witnesses meant they did not form a detailed memory of other aspects such as the offender's description.
Evidence from experts
In complex technical cases, the verdict often hinges on the evidence of an expert such as a medical professional or forensic sci entist, by definition the expert is supposed to know more about a particular subject then either the legal poffiesional or laypeople, as a result the evidence given be experts has a special status unlike other witnesses they are entitled to give their own opinion as experts on the matter especially credible and give it great weight when reaching a verdict.
Miscarriages of justice
Relying on experts carries the risk of a miscarage of justice if they give inaccurate evidence are try state what is a opinion is a scientific fact such as the cases of sally clark, donna anthony and angela cannings were all convicted of killing their infant children on the strength of expert evidence given by sir roy meadow within he told inaccurate evidence as the said that there was only a one in 73 million chanc es of two cot deaths occurring in the same family by chance.
Forensic evidence
to tackle crime. This can affect the validity of their coverage, with a one sided approach that selects information supporting this view.
Moral panics
The media needs an audience to produce profit; this is sometimes done by sensational coverage, for example the 2011 riots, mods and rockers 1960 and the dangerous dogs act in 1991. The exaggeration of the reported events leads to information that doesn't give a valid representation of the crime that is occurring.
Stereotyping
The tabloid press often portrays suspects in a very negative light frequently the portrayal is based on stereotypical views of what an offender looks and behaves like such as a sextural deviant, a creepy loner with strange behavior patterns, odd or unflattering photos are often used to reinforced the image along with quotes from unnamed members of the public such as in the case of christopher jeffery. This coverage leads to trial by the media and as the jeffrey case shows the information produced by these sources is often filled with inaccuracy and bias and they are also low in validity. The media may also racially stereotype such as Hall et al described how the media in the 1970s portrayed mugging as committed only by the young black members of society.
Judgements
The court's judgment is not valid every time this can be down to multiple reasons for example unintentional bias and unconscious stereotyping, political bias and incorrect ruling by judges and coroners.
Unintentional bias in judgment
For the defendants to receive a fair trial it is essential the judgment is unbiased but some studies have shown that unconscious biases can affect the jurors judgment, for example a stimulation show that jurors who believe the justice system is too lenient are likely to judge a defendant guilty.
Race
Judgements and decisions can be influenced by unconscious racial stereotyping, for example plant and peruche found that in a video game simulation police officers were more likely to shoot unarmed black suspects then unarmed white suspects which is an effect called weapon bias. Other US studies have found trial judges and death penalty lawyers have to bais against black people.
Gender
In simulations of rape trails, ellison and munro found that jourors used a victims lack of sighns of physical injury or emotional response,and their delays in reporting the attack as resons for not coming to a guilty verdict these reasons are based on unconscious assu mptions and stereotypes about rape victims
Political bias in judgements
As judges have their own political views there is a risk that these will influence their judgements; one example of this is former Chilean dictator general pinochet. In 1973 pinochet had seized power in a bloody military coup that overthrew the democracy of president salvador allende in 1998 pinochet was visiting britain when he was arrested on request of the spanish government he claimed he had imm unity from arrest but this was dismissed by the house of lords. Lord Hoffman had failed to disclose his links with Amnesty International, a group that supported pinochet. The lords did not suggest that Hoffman was biased; instead they argued that ‘justice must not only be don e , but seen to be done’ and Hoffman's ties with amnesty could give rise to suspicion of bias but there is no certain way of knowing whether it was bais or not.
Inquests
If a sudden death occurs due to the actions of public organizations they receive state funded legal representation at the inquest. By contrast the families have no automatic access to legal aids the pressure group INQUEST argues this is a form of institutional bias and undermines the right to fair treatment, it can be extremely difficult for families to challenge a verdict that they believe to be invalid su ch as the hillsborough disaster.
The hillsborough disaster
a crush developed at the Hillsborough stadium in Sheffield resulting in the deaths of 96 and 766 injured Liverpool fans attending the club's FA Cup semi-final against Nottingham Forest. It remains the UK's worst sporting disaster. It occured after chief superintendent david duckenfield order an exit gate to be opened which led to a serge of supporters when the fenced in pens were already full, rescue efforts were chaotic and some police at first tried to stop fans leaving the pens as at first they believed it to be an pitch invasio n later police fed fake stories to the media blaming hoolignism and drunkenness.
The first inquest
A report by lord justice taylor blamed the police but in 1990 the director of public prosecution announced that no police would face charges, in 1991 inquest verdicts declared the deaths accidental the coroner had ruled that all 96 had died after 3.15pm which meant that the emergenc y services response after that could not be examined. In 2000 the families of the 96 took a private prosecution against duckenfield and another officer duckenfield revealed that he lied but the jury failed to reach a verdict In 2009 the government set up the hillsborough independent panel it published it reports in 2012 the first thorough investigation found that:
The second inquest
In 2012 the high court quashed the accidental death verdicts in 2016 a new inquest found :
similar cases.where the point of law in the present case and a previous one is the same, the court should follow the decisions of the previous case. Following precedent promots consistency and fairness between similar cases and it also provides certainty people know what to expect in a case, given the decision that was reached in a similar previous case.
Why are law reports important The courts can only follow the example if they know what the previous decisions were and the reasoning behind it making it ve ry important to to have these detailed law reports. A report provides a full and accurate record of all the relevant information. This means the court can rely on it as an authoritave statement of the legal principle on which the case was decided. This enables the court to see wheather the earlier case sets a precedent for the one they are currently dealing with.
How valid are law reports
format.
opinion of the person writing it is not included.
