Asses four or more key influences affecting the outcome of criminal cases
Evidence:
Evidence used in a trial should have the main impact on the outcome of a criminal case
since it's what the jury must use to come to a verdict, stated in their oath. Traditionally, the
oath is as follows; “I swear by [According to religious belief] that I will faithfully try the
defendant and give a true verdict according to the evidence.” Evidence, either in physical or
testimonial form, is presented by the prosecution and must be used in order to prove the
defendant's guilt- known as the “Burden of Proof”. The standard of proof, in criminal matters,
is beyond reasonable doubt or until the jury or magistrate are sure of the verdict. The
defence don’t have to prove anything so their job is to cast as much doubt as possible on the
evidence presented. This is a strength for the prosecution as they lead the case, so it means
they have better influence over the outcome of the criminal case. However, it is a
disadvantage for the defence as they can only defend themselves, giving them little
influence on the outcome of the case. Physical evidence, such as fingerprints, are hard to
dispute making them the strongest evidence used in a trial, making it a huge strength to the
case. Whereas, it is much harder to prove the validity of testimonial evidence due to factors
such as lying or false/altered memories making this a weakness. But, there are always
potential weaknesses with physical evidence too. For example, as juries emphasise physical
evidence when contamination occurs, it can lead to miscarriages of justice. Overall, all kinds
of evidence have a large influence on the outcome of criminal cases as certain pieces of
evidence can be the key part in the verdict.
Media:
The media can affect the outcome of a criminal case. If a story is published, the public will
read it and could believe that the material printed is true. This may mean that the suspect
does not get a fair trial, and may create a large inference of guilt. Because of this, in 2012
the Leveson Report was made stating that apart from exceptional circumstances, the
“names or identifying details of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime should not be
released to the press nor the public”. Under English law, a suspect is innocent until proven
guilty, but if a jury has a preconceived idea of the suspect then this could really affect the
outcome of the trial. This is called a “Trial by Media”. A case example of the media having a
heavy influence over the outcome of a criminal case is Christopher Jefferies. he was
arrested and interviewed by the police in connection with the murder of Joanna Yeates in
2010. However, he found himself the subject of a media frenzy, appearing on the front page
of the national newspapers. Jefferies was, in the end, innocent and Vincent Tabak was jailed
for life in October 2011. The newspapers had to issue a public apology and pay substantial
liable damages to Jefferies. This shows that media can be a massive weakness, as it has
the possibility to ruin a trial before it has even become. Furthermore, it is very rare for the
media to follow the assumption of “innocent until proven guilty” when it comes to more high
profile cases.
Witnesses:
Witness testimonies can be called in by both the prosecution and the defence, and are
useful pieces of evidence. If the witness's evidence is not disputed and can be agreed then it
can be read out in court in the form of a statement. If the witness's evidence is disputed or
Evidence:
Evidence used in a trial should have the main impact on the outcome of a criminal case
since it's what the jury must use to come to a verdict, stated in their oath. Traditionally, the
oath is as follows; “I swear by [According to religious belief] that I will faithfully try the
defendant and give a true verdict according to the evidence.” Evidence, either in physical or
testimonial form, is presented by the prosecution and must be used in order to prove the
defendant's guilt- known as the “Burden of Proof”. The standard of proof, in criminal matters,
is beyond reasonable doubt or until the jury or magistrate are sure of the verdict. The
defence don’t have to prove anything so their job is to cast as much doubt as possible on the
evidence presented. This is a strength for the prosecution as they lead the case, so it means
they have better influence over the outcome of the criminal case. However, it is a
disadvantage for the defence as they can only defend themselves, giving them little
influence on the outcome of the case. Physical evidence, such as fingerprints, are hard to
dispute making them the strongest evidence used in a trial, making it a huge strength to the
case. Whereas, it is much harder to prove the validity of testimonial evidence due to factors
such as lying or false/altered memories making this a weakness. But, there are always
potential weaknesses with physical evidence too. For example, as juries emphasise physical
evidence when contamination occurs, it can lead to miscarriages of justice. Overall, all kinds
of evidence have a large influence on the outcome of criminal cases as certain pieces of
evidence can be the key part in the verdict.
Media:
The media can affect the outcome of a criminal case. If a story is published, the public will
read it and could believe that the material printed is true. This may mean that the suspect
does not get a fair trial, and may create a large inference of guilt. Because of this, in 2012
the Leveson Report was made stating that apart from exceptional circumstances, the
“names or identifying details of those who are arrested or suspected of a crime should not be
released to the press nor the public”. Under English law, a suspect is innocent until proven
guilty, but if a jury has a preconceived idea of the suspect then this could really affect the
outcome of the trial. This is called a “Trial by Media”. A case example of the media having a
heavy influence over the outcome of a criminal case is Christopher Jefferies. he was
arrested and interviewed by the police in connection with the murder of Joanna Yeates in
2010. However, he found himself the subject of a media frenzy, appearing on the front page
of the national newspapers. Jefferies was, in the end, innocent and Vincent Tabak was jailed
for life in October 2011. The newspapers had to issue a public apology and pay substantial
liable damages to Jefferies. This shows that media can be a massive weakness, as it has
the possibility to ruin a trial before it has even become. Furthermore, it is very rare for the
media to follow the assumption of “innocent until proven guilty” when it comes to more high
profile cases.
Witnesses:
Witness testimonies can be called in by both the prosecution and the defence, and are
useful pieces of evidence. If the witness's evidence is not disputed and can be agreed then it
can be read out in court in the form of a statement. If the witness's evidence is disputed or
