Testimonial evidence can be biased because this can be based on some opinion, like a group or a person. Evidence like this can be incorrect or invalid, as witnesses can also have a bias and can stereotype people. However, testimonial evidence is always crossed examined n court to make this fair to the defence, and they use a mixture of evidence than solely testimonial evidence given by a person. Physical evidence is fact based, unless it is in the form of expert witnesses giving evidence as it is opinion based.
Amanda Knox had been accused and sentenced for the murder of her roommate Meredith Kercher but was later acquitted. Many expert witnesses had first said that blood had been mixed together with multiple places within the space, including the bathroom, but later trials other expert witnesses had denied the validity and said that the blood could of been mixed because of other unassuming times, like someone got a cut, and later the other had a nosebleed and it could of been coincidental circumstances. More evidence that had been les valid in the trial cases were the fact that when Kercher was assaulted, a bra clasp had been taken a long time to be found after the initial search which could have been contaminated and reduced the validity. A more valid piece of evidence used in court was multiple bruises found on her face, from trying to suffocate her by covering her mouth and nose concluded from her autopsy. When Geude was charged, it had been revealed that he had multiple crimes such as break ins into multiple places which had correlated to the fact he had broken into the flat and assaulted and murdered Kercher. This was also in the case that he had also been arrested for also breaking into a school with a weapon. Geude had plead not guilty, with his statement that he had been invited inti the flat and kissed and touched but did not have intercourse and then left Kercher alone to go to the toilet before seeing someone else over her body, but this wasn’t backed up by any evidence and wasn’t considered valid enough to be used as a formal piece of evidence. Teh judges had said that this did not explain or made his bloody handprint on the ack of a pillow any less valid along with his change in his statement where Knox was not originally there but then said she was. His statement had been contradictory to the evidence at the scene as Kercher had been nude, but Geude said she was fully clothed. In his second statement he had said he had seen Knox’s sillouete outside the place. Knox’s statement had been denied it is validity as she had been denied a lawyer and had been entrapped to admit she had broken it another apartment, assaulted and killed Kercher. The prosecution had said that based on the reconstruction of the scene Knox had assaulted and then inflicted the fatal stab wound as she and her boyfriend held Kercher down and Geude had abused her. Much of the evidence that had been re-examined and had noted that there were lots of errors in the way it was collected, so the evidence collected initially had been reduced in its validity.
The information available from trial transcripts are a real time transcript written by transcribers who are trained to type from verbal prompts directly in the courtroom. These transcripts are usually not biased as they are trained to only write what they hear in a literal sense, and they do not take any other information from any other source other than the court. This can mean that many of these transcripts very valid as they are just word for word alongside the recording of the court. However, it can be a bit less valid because if a person di a non-verbal action, like a more modern movement, and the person does not know what it is, it would be harder to say what it is. A famous trial transcript that includes false information from expert witness Roy Medows in Sally Clarck’s case was the 1 in 73 million chances of SID in 2 children in the same family which was later deemed invalid and inaccurate as it had been disproved in their currency. Sally Clark used this trial transcript as a valid and reliable piece of evidence to eventually get her acquittal and exoneration. This means that Trial Transcripts are a real and valid piece of evidence that can help within court cases for acquittals.
Many media reports are considered invalid as many media reports do tend to cause moral panic. During the 2011 London riots, many media reports say and amplify the situation. One case is of Christopher Jefferies, where he had been arrested but released later, but multiple news outlets had shown clear stereotyping of his case and said he has the murderer even though there had already been another murder suspect who had pled guilty. He had later sued multiple news outlets, such as the Daily Mirror and The Sun where they had stereotyped and gave unrelated information purely based on his appearance, align him creepy, and using other words to describe him as such. Many of these tabloid articles are still considered invalid ever since it was coined. Another case of Sion Jenkins had more unfairly painted him as the murderer of Billie-Jo Jenkins, having given unrelated information about him blaming other people alongside more opinion about their private life rather than the more core facts about the actual case. There are such as the Sun who had alongside published another potential suspect of who murdered Billie-Jo, but it was unrelated information. Many people can sometimes use digital news or traditional news for more of outside the court, but it can pressure people into giving harsher sentences.
Judgements are given by the jurisdiction, such as the Judge and jury. One case that reflects the racial bias is OJ Simpson. In the white jury and Judges, they convicted him and many of the white people at the time saw his as the offender whereas when he went Infront of black judges and jury they did not charge him and found him innocent as also many of the black community found him innocent. Judgements are not always valid or used within a court and can even be used within the judges or juries when planning. This is attempts to avoid bias is using a diverse jury, but Judges still do have the power to sentence people severe depending on their own biases. The media also have a role to play within the judgements as it can influence the jury or judge before the trial had even commenced.
The Hillsborough disaster was one of the most famous failings of the police in handling the public. What had happened was that they had let opened and did not have much concern of the public health along with doing things without orders from their higher ups. The police initially release false information dating that the Liverpool fans were the reason of the deaths toll, then The Sun added onto the fact by publishing a title that red “The Truth” which also blamed the Liverpool fans. These media coverages severely impacted and falsely put the blame on people and stopped the actual justice from coming out. This was down because the police did not want to be seen in a bad light and the media did initially support this fact till further evidence became known. The prosecution did not decide to prosecute anyone due to corruption within the profiling at the time. The independent review panel in 2010 was put together to see the factors that caused the deaths and to also make sure nothing like that within the police force would ever happen again. They concluded that the main cause was not the people but rather the police force having a lack of control with the crowd and poor communication between the force. It was done after pressure from the victim’s families and campaigns which pressured parliament into finding who was responsible. Many of the people who oversaw the day were not charged or had an acquittal without a trial. Graham Mackrell was the only person who was convicted and had a fine of £6500 for public health concerns. I think the judgements by the public enquiry and these judges are not very valid as they can be heavily biased, corrupted, or prejudiced.
Law reports are detailed summaries of a case which gives what had happened within that case to give precedence to maintain constancy within future cases with similar circumstances. Law reports are valid as they have fully accurate information that also come from trial transcripts which they are like edited versions. They are objective as well as they can show the judgements that have preceded and can be fit for any other judgements for such precedence. Opinions found in law reports show the judge and the jury, along with expert witnesses and legal teams as well.
Jurors are usually a diverse group of 12 people who determine if the defender is guilty or not within a case. 9 people minimum must determine if the defender is guilty and they must avoid any media coverage of the case if it is public. Jurors must be 18-75 years old and must be a resident of the UK for at least 5 years since their 13th birthday and are eligible to vote the elections. They cannot be a juror is they have served more than 5 years of prison, and they must wait another 10 years after their time served depending on the severity of their case. Jury is not paid a but some expenses like food, travel or childcare is covered by the court.
Unbiased opinion because they must not be able to research the case. The jury might not be able to do it in the first place because of the punishments that will follow, i.e., they do not want to be in prison for 2 years or get a fine.
A weakness of having jury duty is that jurors don’t need to have any qualifications and are not paid, which if they don’t have any qualifications, then they can be confused by words used within the court and not be able to come to a conclusion based on the terminology used.
The jury also try to not influence other people with the case as much as well since it is also illegal, so it is less biased, and their opinion is not affected as usual.
A weakness of the Jury is of personal beliefs and experiences. A jury member could of relate to a victim, witness, or defender from similar firsthand experiences, or have their opinion swayed based on the involved people’s identity or ethnicity, such as racism or just general bias against a certain minority. A study shown by the NIH in 2021 with homicides show that participants as jury's being exposed to the same case and are more likely to find the defendant guilty if the victim was white compared to Latina and black victims. Emotional victims are also more likely to have the dependent to be found guilty than the opposite.
The jury also can go against the judge, such as nullifying the judge as they can also find the person not guilty or guilty depending on the moral circumstances.
This can be a weakness because some of the jury can have a different moral opinion and can intentionally put a guilty person who did do some immoral things and let the person go, which they can reoffend and do more morally and illegal actions.
The jury are not allowed to discuss information or their opinions about the trial except for the jury room where they can freely talk about the decisions. They are also not allowed to voice their opinions even when asked, even after the trial has ended.
A weakness that can also come across is trial by media, where some jurors could be influenced by the media because of the case and have a biased opinion, and that they can find the defendant guilty or not guilty, which is hard to ignore information, especially if the case is very mainstream.
Magistrates are unpaid members of the public who decide and give people sentences for up to 6 months for a single offence or an unlimited fine, or up to 12 months for multiple offences. The magistrates are advised by a legally qualified clerk. Magistrates must be able to hear clearly, sit, and concentrate with some interest within the case since trials can take up to 6 hours, must be able to understand the people can be fair and logical with sentencing. Magistrates cost less compared to crown court judges. Magistrate court was that £56.8 million and then Crown court are £677 million.
Since there were 3 magistrates there will be democratic and that the opinion will be decided by 3 people instead of one and try to have a diverse background to make sure there are less bias. This showed that magistrates are more representative than crown court judges.
A weakness of Magistrate courts is that there are less ethic and racial backgrounds of the magistrates but is still higher than crown court judges. This lack of diversity can make it harder for the judges to understand or be able to relate to racially motivated crimes.
A strength is having more female magistrates, as of 57%, is that they would potentially be fairer and listen to female defendants or victims within the crime that has happened. This would let them be able to also relate more and understand the female defendant or victim, especially if the experience so more of a one-sided gender experience.
A weakness of the magistrate courts is that if the Magistrate is not properly advised by the clerk, then it can potentially create misunderstanding since the magistrate does not have a qualification and that sentencing can be irregular since some magistrates can give too harsh of a sentence whilst others can be too light of a sentence.
A strength of having an older magistrate is that they have more experience socially and can relate more to problems especially in younger victims or Defendants when they were the same age, as 82% of magistrates are at least 50 or over.
However, a weakness of having older magistrates is that they also might have quite different experiences as well as having similar ones. The magistrate might not be able to relate to the victim or defendant, especially if their backgrounds are also quite different, which can cause bias or not be able to see a reason the defendant decided to commit the act or why the victim finds it much of a problem.
Despite not being legally qualified, they are trained to be able to handle these cases and have a limited understanding of legal terms. Since they also have local knowledge and social awareness, they would be better to have than a judge who is from a higher class and does not have much social awareness.
Another weakness is that the magistrate might become case hardened. This is when the magistrate categorise a type of crime into one and give the same sentencing and outcome despite the fact that all the cases are unique and have special circumstances, such as having a too light of a sentence or too heavy of a sentence for the same crime but different levels of severity because of the uniqueness of each case
Evidence can have a significant positive impact on a case as it is purely scientific evidence that is sufficient to conclude a fair verdict from both sides in the judges and jury. A famous case that used DNA evidence from a very scientific standpoint is Colin Pitchfork’s case. He is a serial killer and rapist who had been convicted in 2 cases of rape and murder, and some evidence had been convicted due to matching DNA from his blood to his semen that had been left within the girls' bodies.
Eyewitnesses are people who have been a part of a crime either audibly or have seen it firsthand, or they can be expert witnesses which they give their opinions on different matters which they have been trained to apply it legally. These can help with the defence or the accuser to give evidence in court and furthermore will be cross-examined in the court.
However, eyewitnesses are not always accurate as in some standard interview leading questions can literally lead people into answering questions how the interviewer wants, like in the Palmer and Lofter study they used different adverbs to describe a car crash which they were divided into 5 groups, and none group they used the adverb “Smashed” and the other “Contacted” which the former gave a higher speed then the latter. This is why they use a combination of cognitive and standard, which they use open ended questions to give off as much reliable and admissible evidence as possible from the witness.
This means that the witness can be extremely influential, but even based on the Palmer and Lofter study, the weapon focus phenomenon and a case of a single witness misidentifying a Louisiana man and him being innocent can prove that witnesses have a negative outcome to the case in court as witnesses can be wrong. The innocence project had proved that 70% of 352 wrongful convictions were overturned due to the fact eyewitnesses give misinformation. Archie William’s case is also an incredibly good case where eyewitnesses are super influential, albeit negative, to the outcome where they had convicted William, who is innocent, with attempted murder, rape, and battery, even though both witnesses said that Williams only looked like the offender, and at most they were 70% sure it was Williams along with DNA evidence showing it wasn’t Williams.
Expert witnesses can also have a negative influence on a case, in the case of Sally Clark when Roy Medows gave misinformation about SIDs in babies and based on that his testimony got multiple innocent women convicted. This is because as humans and as Jury who are ordinary people, they take the advice that what they consider an expert over people like them. One in five expert witness aren’t even qualified, 90% of them aren’t even working in the field, 65% of psychology cases give really poor reports and in quality, 20% of phycologists aren’t qualified and 30% lack experience, and the fact the Expert witnesses are extremely expensive along with 20% go beyond what they know, which with these stats can greatly skew the court judgment because if they are wrong then they can put innocent people into prison for crimes they would never really commit.
Judges do have the power to control the questions of Barristers, which is a positive influence within the outcome of a case as it can prevent intimidation from the defence during cross examination along with a more fair trial, such as irrelevant questions, and a case where an unnamed case had addressed rape myths and had prevented the defence to ask about the “Harmless Flirting” within august of 2023. Judges also do have the power to dismiss and order retrials which can also positively influence the case outcome as it can help get a clear verdict and have been more fair trial in case if it does seem quite complex.
Media
The Media can often cause moral panic as the way that they can present criminal cases. This can cause the public to negatively pressure police to help get these people more severe sentences compared to their actual crime. An incredibly famous example of this is the London riots in 2011 where the sentencing had been inflated and have been more severe from the crimes, such as someone who had stolen £3.50 of water and had gotten 6 months in prison. Another thing is that trial by Media can even give a worse negative impact as having been judged unfairly due to the media presence, such as Cheryl Thomsons study which found that 20% of the jury have found it difficult to disregard and already have formed an opinion on the accused.
Barristers advocate in the crown court where they represent the defence or the accuser which the solicitors give the legal information on the case. This can negatively impact the case as it can cause an injustice as they can defend and help the actual offender get away with their crime. The more convincing a barrister is the more impact that they can have on the outcome of the case and with the verdict, however, to get a good barrister like that to help with the case they are extremely expensive due to their experience etc. For example, Dr Stephen Lawrence had been accused of 13 counts of rape but had the charges dropped before trial, but he had to be hired, and even with help of the government had to pay $61k out of the £101k for his legal team.
Relevant evidence is evidence that is useful for both the defence and the prosecution to help prove or disprove the case in court. Relevant evidence can be removed during a case as it be considered not relevant enough or irrelevant to proving guilt or innocence. Some relevant evidence used in James Bulger’s case was an image of James bulger being led out of the mall with his capture from a CCTV camera.
Another famous case where Relevant evidence proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt is Jeremy Bamber’s case where many blood splatters, fingerprints, and other pieces of evidence like number of bullets and shots, along with the suspect’s build and mental state of the people involved had all pointed to Jeremy Bamber staging the supposed murder-suicide which his adopted sister, Sheila, had been the initial blame after he phoned the police of the shots. The only relevant evidence that the defence had to prove Bamber's innocent was that Sheila was Schizophrenic and had a poor relationship with her family.
Admissibility evidence is relevant and legal evidence used in court which a Judge would fine admissible. This can include legal confessions, witness statements, expert witness statements and more tangible evidence like DNA and forensics.
Section 78 of the PACE act 1984 is the exclusion of material that had been obtained illegally and in its own right a pert of inadmissible and irrelevant evidence, such as forced confession likely gained through torture, without a break for an extended period of time, or gained through violence or threatening to do so.
In the Damilola Taylor case, there was evidence from expert witnesses that state the cause of death in all of their trials that he died from falling not a glass bottle which made him bleed to death, but other pieces of evidence, like DNA forensics, state that these 2 brothers were to blame for his death. Another piece d discarded evidence was from Witness Bromley who had been a key witness before she would find to be lying, and the case had fallen cold. The expert witness is proof of the Relevance to the case of Taylor’s, the key witness is an example of a form of unreliability with her witness statement, and the admissibility of the DNA forensics showing and linking the brothers to Taylor’s murder shows the admissibility of the evidence within the case.
Colin Stagg was originally convicted for Rachel Nickel’s murder after 6 months of a woman going undercover to coax a confession out of him in the form of him sending her letters of sexually violent fantasies used in court which a later trial, the judge declared they shouldn’t of been able to use it or even consider it as evidence in the case.
The case of O.J Simpson is known for many improper handlings and illegally obtained evidence, such as a detective having especially broken into his home without a warrant and found evidence within the house that linked him into the murders of his case. This, coupled with the detective's racist past was considered inadmissible in the court by the judge.
Hearsay is usually not allowed in court as it is considered second-hand information and witness testimony, which the police would usually use to get to the first hand witness which is stated in section 114 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 which Hearsay is not allowed unless they go under some expectations, which one of the exceptions are the person is unavailable from death, fear, or illness. A famous example of this s Al-Khawaja where a doctor had assaulted 2 patients, and one of the patients died before trial, but her witness statement was read under these rules. Another case is Tahery was that the witness was injured with intent for the perpetrator and the witness was too scared to testify in court, so his witness statement was read also under hearsay rules.
In Sally Clark’s case there was a miscarriage of justice where Alan William had withheld information in the babies that bacteria within the 2 babies were present and that they had instead killed them instead. This Withheld or information and evidence had eventually brought an innocent mother to get convicted and when she got exonerated, she found out about this holding of information.
I Got Beans, Greens, Potatoes, Tomatoes, Lamb, Rams, Hogs, Maws. Beans, Greens, Potatoes, Tomatoes, Chicken, Turkeys, Rabbit. YOU NAME IT! Beans, Greens, Potatoes, Tomatoes, Lamb, Rams, Hogs, Maws. Beans, Greens, Potatoes, Tomatoes. Chicken, Turkeys, Chicken, Turkeys. Beans, Greens, Potatoes, Tomatoes, Lamb, Rams, Hogs, Maws, Beans, Greens, Potatoes, Tomatoes, Chicken, Turkeys, Rabbit. YOU NAME IT!
Theft from a shop under a certain amount of money can get the offender up to 7 years in prison and is considered a triable either-way offence which is where it can either be tried in a magistrate court or a crown court. Common assault can get the offender up to 6 months in prison and is considered a summary offence, which is the lowest type of offence and is mostly tried in a magistrate court. Grievous bodily harm (the most serious case of battery) can get the offender up it 5 years in prison and is done in a triable either way offence.
Before entering a court room, the suspects would go through the process of stopping and searching on the reasonable grounds of having a weapon modified or used to commit crime, then arrested by the police if the evidence is found and then detained. After, the person will be interview by the police for more evidence for an admission of a crime before being charged and being given a court date via post.
Then the person is put onto bail as long as the conditions of the Bail act 1976 is met: failure to comply and surrender in custody, committing a crime whilst in bail, preventing or trying to persuade a witness to give a testimony against the suspect, for the suspect’s own protection, i.e. if the person is a child, or breaking the conditions of the bail. If bail is granted, there will often be conditions attached to the bail either given by a magistrate court or the police.
PLEA BARGAINING
If the person pleads guilty, then the court will be adjourned, where, depending on the court hearing, the case will not go to trial and the sentencing will be reduced, also known as plea bargaining. If the person does not plead guilty, then they will adjourn and then arrange a trial date.
MAGRISTATE COURT
The magistrate court is a court comprised of volunteers with usually no jury and 2-3 magistrates who have no qualifications and are usually volunteers. They have a distric judge who will listen to the case presented by barristers and solicitors and get legal advice from an advisor who has a legal qualification in Law. The magistrate usually deals with simple and straightforward cases with minimal parties, such as robberies, minor damage, and minor vandalism, along with common assault. It can occasionally deal with more serious crimes, such as fraud under £10,000 and possession of c-b drugs which is classed as a triable-either way offence, but will always pass on serious offences, such as murder, rape, and robbery. The magistrate can only give up to 12 months in prison on multiple offences, 6 months on a single, fine, community sentences and bans related to the offence, where it can be appealed depending on the sentence or if the defendant is seen as not guilty, which can only happen within 21 days after the trial. A case that happened recently in April is a man of Adam Reid who is a chimney sweeper who had committed fraud and stole up to £30,000, who had been seen at a magistrate court and later a crown court.
CROWN COURT
The Crown court is a court compromised of a judge and 12 jury, which they all are qualified legally. They jury are the ones who determine if the defendant is guilty or not guilty, which there must be a 11/12 voting of guilty beyond reasonable doubt to be determined as guilty. During court they must listen to the defence and the prosecution. They usually deal with serious offences, such as rape, murder, and manslaughter, known as indictable offences, but can occasionally deal with less serious cases, such as fraud over £10000 and possession of c-b drugs, also known as triable either way offences. The crown court can give any other sentencings, including life without parole, which is the highest sentencing that can be given, which can be appealed if there is permission to do so by a judge, which has to take place 28 days of sentencing/conviction, and that they can only do so if the conviction is considered unsafe, i.e., the law was applied incorrectly or there is new evidence regarding the defendant's case. A case that happened recently in April is a man of Adam Reid who is a chimney sweeper who had committed fraud and stole up to £30000, who had been seen at a magistrate court and later a crown court.
COURT OF APPEALS
Any appeal going against the crown court determining the sentencing of the crown court against the defendant are done in the court of appeals and can review the case there. It is considered a senior court, and cases are usually heard from 3 judges who also have legal qualifications and experience, which are usually a member of the court, 2 high court judges or a high court judge and a senior circuit judge. There are also 39 other members of the justice of appeals who also hear the case. The appeal time if you wanted to appeal the case from the court of appeals in 21 days.
SUPEREME COURT
The supreme court is also an appeal court that hears appeals form the court of appeals if it is in place. The UK supreme court makes the final decision of the legal case in that court. There are 13 members of the Supreme court, including the judge who must have at least 15 years of practice as a lawyer and 2 years as a high court judge and are chosen by the monarch at the time. They only deal with the most complicated or serious cases, such as cases that affect the entire population. The case that recently went there was the trans case that says that trans women are not defined as women legally.
The Crown Prosecution Service determine who and what gets prosecuted in court as it can be a waste of public money and time. They also determine which court gets the case, such as all crimes go to the Magistrate court whilst other more serious crimes going to the Crown Court, which can also maybe go to the UK Supreme court. Across England and Wales, there are around 7000 people who work for the CPS, with the majority lawyers to ensure that the cases are handled well and lawfully so that justice is ensured fairly throughout the entire investigation and to also work with the police and also provide additional support for victims during the processing of crime. The Prosecution of Offences acts in 1985 rewritten how crime gets prosecuted and processed whilst the Criminal Justice act 2003 clears up how these processes are done and what to do for Criminals who do get prosecuted, such as the type of punishment, how long they have to do the punishment for and what to do after and also to helped understand why they did so they can unlearn the behaviour's leading up to the criminal behaviour.
The test that the Crown prosecution service uses to prosecute suspects is called the Full Code Test, which has two stages: stage one which has the Evidential test which sees if the evidence is strong enough or has enough evidence which is admissible, or allowed in court, reliable evidence, which is evidence that is not tampered with or can be seen as reliable and that if there isn’t any contradictory evidence. If it cannot pass this test or any one of the tests within, then the case cannot go any future despite the nature of the case and if the case is socially sensitive. If they do pas this test, then it can move onto the public interest test.
The Public interest test has 7 stages within the test. One of the stages is that the CPS test to see how serious the offence was. If it is more serious, then they will morel consider bringing it to court compared to less serious offences, such as choosing to spend more time and money into getting a murder case into court rather than a low-level theft case. Another stage within the public interest test is to see if the offender is under the age of 18, to which if they are under the age then they do have to see the child’s best interests as well and make sure that the punishment doesn’t completely affect their entire future which is proportionate to the actual crime and it’s serious. Another stage of the public interest test is to see if any of the information that will be released to the public might affect the investigation and the evidence within just in case if it will damage the sources and further evidence that might produce the case.
However, if the public interest stage is higher but the evidence stage has not passed in the rare case that happens and if more evidence is on the way, then the Threshold test will be applied. The first stage is where if there are reasonable grounds to suspect the person to commit the crime and be able to hold them accountable, and in the case if there will be further evidence to come along the way. Another stage is that if the case is serious enough, then they can go and charge the person or keep them accountable in the case of people being able to bail the person who is suspected out. Another stage is that in the case of the public wanting the person to be charged in that case.
Abu Hamza was a Muslim who had been arrested for terrorism charges, but the CPS had failed to prosecute him due to a lack of evidence. He had been known to praise the 9/11 attackers and had been with extremists, and in 2004 had been arrested for the account said above on the case of the 1998 Yemen attack. Christoper Kappesa was also failed by the CPS because the public didn’t want the suspect to be prosecuted and that it was a manslaughter charge because it was intended to be a fun time and no one actually wanted to hurt him in a genuine since, however the family had may likely been unhappy with the situation and it felt like it was the suspect over the victim’s death, which can be understandably be distressing.
The suspects would firstly be stopped and searched on the grounds of probable cause. The suspects cannot be stopped and search because of the refusal of answering questions as they cannot force you to say. The suspects are allowed to ask if they are being detained. If not, then they can leave.
If there are areas for arrest, then they will be arrested and then brought into the police station where they will check in and then interviewed. Then they may go back to their cells, and then the system will check if they do have enough evidence to charge and then if they are charged then they will be put on bail and then their plea hearing before they get put in the court room and then they can appeal.
They can be held within the cell for up to 24 hours, but a superintendent 12 hours or if you go to a magistrate for an indictable offence they can extend up to 96 hours, but another is a terrorist act with the home secretary can authorise up to 14 days. Suspects have the right to ask for a police id and see why they are conducting a search. They can also ask if they will be arrested or the next step to or they can ask for the paperwork, laws, the object they will search, the grounds of search etc.
Suspects have the right to silence under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 can be used when the suspects fail to mention any relevant facts, questions about their clothes and their location at a particular time.
There can be a citizen's arrest and a police arrest. Community support officer cannot perform an arrest. Citizen's arrest must have reasonable grounds for an arrest and the reasonable force to arrest. On arrival in custody, they are allowed medical treatment if they do have any injuries. They have the right to be informed of an arrest to another person depending on the crime. They are also allowed a free lawyer and the codes of practice to identify what is not met that the police should follow.
The police and criminal evidence act 1984 (PACE) under code C, the police are supposed to give you a cell that has to be adequately maintained, with two light meals and one main meal within any 24 hours with reasonable access to drinks upon requests with at least an 8 hours rest in every 24 hours along with a phone call to tell someone of what is happening. Section A of the same act describes and gives the rules of how to arrest a suspect. Any rules not followed or broken can be brought up in court. Minors can have the option to have an appropriate adult, or if they are being detained abroad, they can have the access to a translator. Before being put on bail, suspects are given the option to talk to a defence lawyer.
Under section 24 of the police and criminal evidence act 1984, police can arrest you without a warrant if you had been in any way involved with a crime or they have reasonable grounds to suspect you committed a crime. The police are also required to identify themselves and tell them what is happening and if they are arrested and why they must arrest a suspect even if it is obvious according to Code G in PACE. The Serious Organised Crime and police act in 2005 states that if there is criminal activity they must consider if an arrest is necessary or not.
Police officers when they have a warrant for an arrest can search the suspect’s home. They are not allowed to search the house if they do not have a warrant.
Suspects are given rights because they are human beings and despite what they may or may not have done they still deserve to have rights. Suspects are also only suspects and are also given rights as there is the chance law enforcement might have caught the wrong person and that they are innocent.
Witnesses and victims have the right to withdraw for the case, can be able to do it online rather than physical. There is eyewitness protection along with security and what is happening in the case. The victim code covers their rights, such as the ones mentioned above or even be able to be put up for parole along with compensation for the crime if granted by a court and they can be given extra advice if they do have needs, such as a minor. If the crime has a psychological aspect, they can have access to a therapist along with going over to the family to help them during the case. They can also have a restraining order or similar practices. They are also given information about how a court trial works as a witness or victim.
These witnesses and victims have access to the Victim Charter and the Witness charter. These two are a document and depending on where it comes from lays out the rights and support of the individuals within a case. If the victims or witnesses feel that the offender’s sentence is not severe enough then they can appeal to an attorney general. If they agree with said appeal, then it will be sent to the court of appeals within 28 days. This is the same Vise versa if the suspect feels like their sentence is too harsh or they are innocent. The appeals can be done form magistrates, to crown court, to court of appeals and then the supreme court. This is only done if the defendant is found guilty as there is no law that states that we can appeal if the defendant is found not guilty.
Right 2 describes the fact that victims can have the details of the crime within a reasonable and minimal amount of time after giving information of the crime in the form of a witness statement. Interviews should also be minimal, and they should prevent contact between suspects and witnesses. Right 3 are also provided with basic knowledge of the crime and they have the right to be updated about the crime and in a way that would not compromise safety of the victim in certain cases.
Right 6 describes and updates the victim about key decisions of the case. They will also describe why they will not investigate the case and why, and if they do decide to investigate then they will ask you how and where you would like to be informed.
A custody Officer carries out an innitial check and record what their belongings along with if they need a doctor or not and if they do need assistance for any special needs. They also must check up on the person first after 6 hours and every 9 hours after to see if their detention is justified. They also update a custody record about what is happening at the station as well and they can also charge the suspect if there is enough evidence.
A famous case that set out the rights for legal advice under PACE section 58 is that Sammuel's was denied a solicitor and his confession was used in court after following the denial in the interview. The court of appeals denied the conviction after stating that the denial of legal advice like a solicitor was unnecessary and a violation of his rights and they should of gave him one. Now, they do have to give you a solicitor in a maximum time of 36 hours after the arrest and only in the rare circumstances a suspect can be denied legal advice if it can prevent the collection of evidence, alerting accomplices etc.
Another case is that the trial judge found out that Grant had not been informed of all his rights, including legal representation which he argued in court, but the police argued back that they had not violated anything because he had not been detained.
Before any collection of samples, first responders, like police, take well-lit photos of the scene and noting down the conditions, like humidity, time, and temperature. They then section out the area but depending on how long it had been before discovery then the reliability can be questioned. There are also risks that the responders can accidentally contaminate the crime scene before documentation.
For blood samples, wet blood is swabbed with a sterile cotton swap and then let dried as to not prevent moulding and any leakages in future stages. If dry, then it is scraped off with a sterile object and put into a similar container. The way the blood was found, like blood splatters can also help reconstruct the crime scene. The dry blood samples are then stored in a container in a paper bag to also prevent moulding. They label the sample before they put it away for transfer and storage along with who had handled the sample and. However, there is always a risk of moulding and incorrect labelling. Blood samples are stored in the conditions of 4 degrees C for short term storage to avoid going bad with dry ice whilst waiting for testing as to preserve the initial conditions. They are handles with sterile protection, such as gloves to further avoid contamination and bacteria growth. Analysis can determine the blood type, and deficiencies of the person, and determine if it is from the victim or the perpetrator. It is also crossmatched with everyone on the criminal database or suspects to also increase efficiency and time on the investigation. However, the risk of the chain of custody breaking can break or even contaminate the blood samples accidentally which in the case of then they do have to state in court. Blood samples are presented by the CPS in court with the blood test results. This includes all information, such as the conditions it came in, the chain of custody and how it was tested. The court will consider it reliable if it is handled with care, all steps are documented and preformed. It is best practise to explain in detail and get an expert witness to explain it to the lay. There is a risk of missing steps or mislabelling of evidence. A case where blood evidence was misused was David Butler. There was almost no link between him and the victim other than a tiny amount of blood and other DNA underneath her fingernails which could have easily been transferred there in other ways other than the scratch that the prosecution had claimed could of came onto the person.
Fingerprints are usually collected by dusting the surface of places that could potentially contain fingerprints with a specialised powder that clings to what is produced from the fingerprints. If it is visible, like bloody fingerprints or on glass, then they will take photos firstly. Otherwise, the fingerprints are revealed using a chemical if the fingerprint is on a porous surface, like on someone’s clothes. The print is then lifted with a lifting tape which can be seen more visibly with black or white paper. When collecting, they wear gloves as to not contaminate and add their own fingerprints, and to not smudge the initial sample. They will store this in a paper bag to preserve the integrity of the fingerprint in order not to lose the information on the piece of evidence. It is processed and crossmatched against a criminal database. If it is a mystery fingerprint, it will be added as such. If there is a match, then it will be considered as evidence and then considered to be used in court. Then this will be presented to the court by the CPS. This includes all information, such as where the fingerprint was located and the chain of custody. The court will consider it reliable if it is handled with care, all steps are documented and preformed. It is best practise to explain in detail and get an expert witness to explain it to the lay. There is a risk of missing steps or mislabelling of evidence. A case where fingerprint evidence was misused was Clemente Aguirre-Jarquin. He was exonerated in 2018 after 14 years of being in prison and was sentenced to death for murder. The fingerprint used in evidence was unreadable and cannot have been able to use in court. This not only put him as a wrongly convicted person but also brought up new evidence of the real killer, who was the daughter of the victims.
Small strands of hair are collected via tweezers gently and placed against a contrasting background for visibility. It is then bagged up, signed and sealed before being sent to shipping. Pictures of the hair will be taken against the contrasting background before being packaged up. Then the hair will be tested for health, whether it had been dyed and what type. If it has the hair follicle attached, then it can be tested for DNA against the DNA database which will speed up the case. The data will be recorded and stored in a paper bag or on a digital database if it contains DNA. If the DNA does not match, then it will be put as a mystery match. The hair will also be tested for fine partials and other debris as hair can be quite easy to hold lots of fine partials, like drugs and pollen. This can help to locate where a body had been initially killed or where it had travelled to help speed up the case. Then this will be presented to the court by the CPS. This includes all information, such as where the hair strand was located and the chain of custody. The court will consider it reliable if it is handled with care, all steps are documented and preformed. It is best practise to explain in detail and get an expert witness to explain it to the lay. There is a risk of missing steps or mislabelling of evidence. The Long Island serial killer was solved because of a hair stand match was found on multiple victims' body. It was matched and identified as Hatchman's after some bit of saliva on a discarded pizza crust was tested and matched to the hairs.
Whan a shoeprint is discovered, photos of it will be taken of where it was located and then lifted with footprint powder and adhesive lifting tapes. If the shoeprint has depth, then they will cast it in an old, let it set and dry before bagging it up and labelling. The shoeprint will be packaged up in protective paper if it was in a cast and then labelled. They are usually stored in a safe and controlled environment which is kept for future use in the court and analysis. Then they analyse the footprint for the type of shoe, how heavy the person is, the gait and size of the person. This can determine a lot of traits of a person, such as the expense of the shoe to rule out some groups of people, the weight and size which h can also help narrow down the suspect pool. Then this will be presented to the court by the CPS. This includes all information, such as where the shoe print was located and the chain of custody. The court will consider it reliable if it is handled with care, all steps are documented and preformed. It is best practise to explain in detail and get an expert witness to explain it to the lay. There is a risk of missing steps or mislabelling of evidence. Aron Hernadez’s case against him was solved and revolved around the footprint left at the murder scene. Thery had determined it was him because of many matching characteristics like stated above along with expert testimonies statin g it was the model of shoe brand along with other DNA evidence helped convicting a case against him.
When semen is discovered within a victim, like the vagina or anus, or on a victim, like skin or clothes, or on other surfaces, like a floor or other surfaces. When wet it will be swabbed with a cotton swap and let dried before placing in a paper bag and labelled on where, when, and how the sample was collected. It will be stored in a paper bag to prevent bacteria growth and moulding. They label the sample before they put it away for transfer and storage along with who had handled the sample and. However, there is always a risk of moulding and incorrect labelling. Blood samples are stored in the conditions of 4 degrees C for short term storage to avoid going bad with dry ice whilst waiting for testing as to preserve the initial conditions. They are handles with sterile protection, such as gloves to further avoid contamination and bacteria growth. Analysis can determine the blood type, and deficiencies of the person, and determine if it is from the victim or the perpetrator. It is also crossmatched with everyone on the criminal database or suspects to also increase efficiency and time on the investigation. However, the risk of the chain of custody breaking can break or even contaminate the semen samples accidentally which in the case of then they do have to state in court.
Eyewitnesses are people who have experienced or seen a crime firsthand. Their accounts are usually written down or recorded as in the case they will forget parts of the crime. When their testimony is transcribed, they must review it for it to be accurate to that they remember. Often, they are asked to describe what they witnessed in a bunch of interviews to police, along with standard and cognitive information to extract as much information as possible and then given to the CPS.
Expert witnesses are people who have specialised knowledge of an area to give opinions and legal information to a court to explain what has happened, such as IT or medical experts. A famous failing of an expert witness is Sally Clark’s case where she was wrongfully convicted for infant murder of her two sons. Roy Meadow’s claim of the event of SIDs in 3 babies were almost agronomically impossible, in what he said was 1 out of 73 million, which was later shown not to be true. Alan William had also withheld information in the babies that bacteria within the 2 babies were present and that they had instead killed them instead.
Vulnerable witnesses are eyewitnesses of the crime, but many be unable to relay the information clearly from being a minor, out of fear, pressure and distress, or they may have a mental disorder which prevents them from being able to communicate effectively what had happened.
Eyewitnesses give their testimony in front of the jury and the entire courtroom. They give it from the witness box under oath which differs as vulnerable witnesses give the testimony either outside of court in a protected state like a protective screen, such as where they are unable to see the defendant or the public. These testimonies are usually collected and stored securely on a password protected secure database or network where it would be harder to lose in case of an e-crime.
Disclosure is giving evidence and relevant information to the opposite, such as the defender giving information to the accuser and the accuser giving evidence to the defender. This includes the police giving necessary information to both parties from what they had documented which is given to the CPS which they relay to the court and lawyers. There are strict rules about the collection of testimonial evidence which must be relevant and admissible in a courtroom. The CPS will test this evidence through the full code test which includes the evidential stage. This will see if the evidence is admissible, credible, and reliable based on the person who is giving the information.
The duty to disclose is where the police or the CPS will disclose the defendant information which assists in their case to prove their innocence.
If they are inadmissible, they are evidence that is hearsay evidence, forced, illegally obtained or an entrapment. Hearsay is where it is more of a second-hand account, forced is where the confession was forced from the person using violence, threats and torture, illegally obtained by using unlawful means to gather the evidence which breaches laws or rights and entrapment which is basically trying to trick someone into committing or confessing to a crime which they wouldn’t of committed normally. An example is the Colin Stag case where they had been using a honey trap to try to incriminate him, which is considered illegal as this was extensive and had been obtained only through a honeytrap.
The process of transfer is going from the police which are the first responders and have the evidence stored which is given to the CPS which prefer the full code test to see whether or not it should go to a court, which if it has then it will give to the court. In court the evidence will be tested, critiquing the witness statement, and challenged to see if they do hold up in the court also known as cross examination.
Forensics is the science of observing samples of victims or offenders DNA and determining what had happened within a crime scene. Alex Jefferys is the inventor of the technique of the use of genetic fingerprints and DNA profiling to be used in criminal cases in 1993 which is now used in the police national database with DNA is used.
DNA can be used in a range of physical crimes such as murder, sexual and non-sexual assault where there can be DNA evidence of the victim or on the offender such as bodily fluids such as blood, semen, hair, skin cells or even spit can be left behind. Also on bulgers, there can be DNA left, such as fingerprints or other bodily fluids. It is also useful if it is a serial offender as there can be multiple pieces of DNA that can match with previous cases and can link the crimes quicker to each other and find matching factors. However, DNA forensics might not always explain a crime well or if they even committed a crime such as a person might just have been in the wrong place wrong time. Although there is not a direct case like wrong place wrong time, there is the Rachel Nickell’s murder in 1992, where Colin Stag was originally convicted from a honey trap and then found out from modern technology where Robbert Napper was eventually convicted and plead guilty from DNA evidence which DNA forensics can also prove the innocence of convicted offenders.
However, you can also use DNA forensics using partial DNA matching such as relatives getting tested and partially matching a previous case of a crime and that DNA left there which can have grounds on which they can get a warrant for an arrest. For example, in the case of Colette Aram there was a mystery DNA profile that was left unsolved till 2008 where there was a partial from the son of the perpetrator and had gotten a warrant for the arrest and eventually convicted him. This eventually leads to people within the family being tested for the DNA till a match is found which is how it can speed up a case.
However, in many cases of human error, Clemente Aguirre-Jarquin's case he was wrongfully convicted because on many pieces of evidence there was evidence of the victim's daughter/granddaughter's prints on the weapons and the fact that a piece of evidence leading to his exoneration that a fingerprint on the murder weapon was virtually unreadable and cannot be used formally as evidence. This is proof of the human error and how DNA can be falsely used to prove guilt even if there might be some hidden evidence of the opposite in his case.
Forensic DNA analysis is only useful in physical assaults, not any purely verbal of e-crimes. There are many cases, such as the use of the dark web or spreading viruses on suspicious sites which is very hard to prove purely on DNA as people can switch and use multiple devices and getting swatches on multiple devices are most likely not going to be given a warrant by a judge along with it is not going to be very useful in court unless ther are other pieces of evidence within the case.
DNA is also useful to help prove guilt in court when other means are not possible or come clean as this is very much scientifically based and depending on the amount of DNA evidence used can impact the outcome in a court. An example of this is from Colin Pitchfork who was the first person is not convicted using DNA evidence. Pitchfork committed multiple offences against different girls who he had left DNA in them which had been a mystery person before his refusal of a blood sample where he was eventually convicted.
Forensics can also apply to nature, such as crime scenes happening in a garden. Scientists can test and identify pollen form different plants or spores from different fungi. There was this case where a man had tried to hide a body in nature, but it was found on his clothes and on her body that they had both picked up the same pollen and spores and can determine what had happened to what he did to her after her death. This is an effective use as it can not only re-enact what had happened during a scene but to also show the time of death of the body and figure out the timeline to match with suspects and eventually get a conviction with the use of insects and decomposition rates to see where the crime had actually happened. However, this can only be applied to places that had happen outside and in a homicide case rather than any other cases.
The CPS must be effective by ignoring biases, looking at the investigation as whole and being consistent to also avoid charging innocents. They also work apart from other organisations to also remove bias and pressure from those other bodies, meaning that they can further be more effective in making decisions on a case and speeding it up where then there is a persecution. They are also effective when they work with other bodies despite not being pressure. Their decisions might not be influenced but them, but they also work with the police to also help them make more unbiased decisions in a case which can also speed up a case. The also put every case through the same test so there is more equality.
CPS workers ' salaries start at £25,000, with experienced workers gong up to £80,000 and up for senior workers. This is effective as many starters and regular workers can be hired to be part of the CPS and to help speedup p a case as there are more of them, working on a singular case.
They have much experience and expertise in law so they can make more accurate and more informed legal decisions in these cases along with analysis and preparing these cases for court. They also have the expertise to think logically about the case without other intervention and to see whether the results and evidence collected are realistic to even go to court.
The CPS are available 24/7 to the public and the police as they must be their effort every case and to also speed up a case to be more effective. The demand of CPS workers is also going up due to retiring workers and crime rates going up.
However, there are many budget cuts and shortages of staff along with having to work a high stress environment. There are also personal biases and human error included as well in the process. Alongside that, they might not have the best relationship with the police as they also rely on poor communication and the fact that staff are sometimes undertrained, which can lead to cases where innocent people get persecuted.
Crime scene investigators are trained to take in as much detail as possible from a crime scene with multiple people to avoid errors. They use specialised equipment as well to improve effectiveness and reliability on the evidence they collect and are trained to not tamper with evidence and to keep the integrity of the scene to be more accurate in their searches. This also helps minimise the amount of time needed to spend in a lab for quicker results. They are also trained and effective at not contamination of a scene or piece of evidence in a case.
Starter salaries with Investigators start at £24,00 and go up to £43,000 for experienced ones. This means that the government can have more investigators to more thoroughly and more effectively speed up a case to take on more cases.
Crime Scene Investigators are also trained to take images of the crime scene and before they start handling and collecting evidence and sending them to the lab. They also determine what had happened initially in the scene and determine if it had happened in the room or not and what else had happened to figure out the timeline f the events within the room.
Like above, the crime scene investigators also work from a 9-6 and has weekends, nightshifts, and holiday as well, meaning that at least a few are available within any time. This is effective to speed up cases when there is one, however the demand of crime scene investigators still goes up as crime goes up. However, there is many limitations as there is also a factor of human error, the fact that they work in a high-stress environment with increased demands plus the possibility of the real contamination evidence which can stump an investigation and case. Just from what they get alone is not enough to convict a person since there is a need for DNA evidence and other things as well that they are not specialised to do.
Pathologists must be effect and quick in the autopsies of the victim’s deaths and murders as the must make sure that the case can get to the court. They also must be able to effectivity explain the information and give it to court or to the police to further help with the case for homicide cases and anything similar, such as grievous bodily harm in assault cases. They also must be able to make sure that the evidence that they give is not contaminated.
Pathologists usually have a salary of £60,000 to £100,000 but many start at £40,000 and can even go up to £120,000 annually in specific fields. This makes it less likely to hire pathologists as there will be less of them which makes it ineffective in a case and of the workload of such.
Pathologists have the knowledge and expertise of forensic pathology, meaning they can apply their branch of medicine in a legal context. They preform autopsies and can confirm the cause of death in homicide cases or assist in assault cases and can be used as evidence and build a stronger case within a court.
Majority of pathologists work in daylight hours from 9-6, but there can be pathologists who work nightshifts depending on the severity of the case and the demand. However, the demand of pathologists is increasing because of the lack of people who want to take up pathology and the pathologists who do retire.
A limitation that pathologists do face is majority human error as they can miss out key evidence or count pieces of unusable evidence as factual evidence which can lead to wrongful convictions. They are also unable to determine other aspects of the crime other than pure DNA evidence given to them, so they are not extremely useful for providing the full sequence of events.
Forensic scientist often must get evidence to and from the lab quickly and efficiently to aid in the case. They also must not crossly contaminate the evidence supplied to them that should be tested. They also must be able to test the evidence as quickly as possible to further aid the case and they should not overlook any evidence or detail for the scenario it is essential for the case. The evidence that they get and give are also not biased, which can either clear an offender or put them away, such as the time of a death or how they died.
Based on location and position, forensic scientist can earn up from £15,000 to over £50,000, with more earning upwards of £100,000, but are very select and happen in only a few fields. This means that you can hire many less experienced ones, yet you cannot have many of the more experienced pathologists which can lead to less effectiveness.
Forensic scientists are crucial for finding chemical-based evidence for a criminal case. They also must have effective communication skills and must be able to explain the scientific evidence to a more understandable point. They also must be good a problem solving and piecing information based what is given and work will with the police.
Forensic scientists are always available to the police as they do have to be able to respond to any crime scenes or any emergencies as for effectiveness and to get the case to court as fast as they could.
A limitation is that the evidence that the can provide can be inconsistent or done from human error, especially if they must work on some evidence quite quickly. Another limitation is from budget constraints. This can affect the efficiency in finding accurate evidence and the time it can take to get the evidence which can also affect the reliability of said evidence.
Police are usually the first on the crime scene which can make sure the evidence collected are reliable and not contaminated by anything that can prohibit the investigation. They also have reliable resources when in an investigation, such as working well with other organisations and technology to further aid and collect evidence as part of the criminal investigation. They are also effective as the police are further trained to be less biased based on who is the offender and how to consider all the facts and try to get it into court to get it convicted for the victim’s sake.
Starting salary per year is over £31,100, but can vary, and can also go up to £48,000 every year and over depending on the position. This is very affective because the government can further fund more police to tackle more cases at the same time.
The police are trained and preferred to be people who can work under pressure, a detailed understanding of the legal procedures, law, effective communication skills and the general understanding of the social situation in their local area along with maintaining professionalism, especially if the case can be triggering in any way. This is done to be able to handle more cases and can be considered effective as this can speed up cases and handle more at the same time.
The police are regularly available all the time, as part of the emergency services are required to be. This is done so that in case of emergencies, as said, are done as quickly and efficiently as possible, plus to ensure reliability on evidence of the emergency. This helps to attend to cases as quickly as possible and is effective at speeding up cases and being efficient with workload.
A few limitations are that they have a certain time to get evidence which can be quite ineffective if the police had been working that time for it to never be able to be convicted and can even be a problem if there are other more important cases that they could have been working on instead.
Another limitation is that they have budget cuts, and they do have to priorities some investigations over others which can bring around some ineffectiveness when it comes to getting cases.
qwertyuiop[]\ qwertyuiop[]\
the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the. ee
the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the the. ee
