Draw conclusions from information
Verdicts
Safe verdicts mean a verdict that is reached on the basis of all relevant facts of the matter
after a fair trial. To achieve this the evidence must be admissible, reliable and credible, as
well as sufficient to justify the verdict and court procedures must have been followed
correctly during the trial. Unsafe verdicts can occur when there are problems with the
evidence or the trial process. This can then cause a miscarriage of justice where a
defendant is convicted of a crime they did not commit. The verdict is usually appealed and
overturned by the Court of Appeal. This mainly happens on the basis of new evidence. The
innocence project was founded in 1992 and attempts to exonerate the wrongly convicted
through DNA testing and reforms the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. In
the case of Herman Atkins, he was wrongly charged of robbery and rape. Following the
rape, the victims clothing, including the sweater wiht semen stains, was collected and
marked for identification. The semen swabs were developed by someone with blood type A,
which is Atkins typing. The victim was also shown a photo lineup where she identified Atkins
as her assailant. He served 12 years in prison but was later exonerated after the innocence
project ran tests on three separate areas of the victims sweater and in all areas, the results
excluded Atkins.
Convictions
A wrongful conviction essentially means the person convicted is factually innocent of the
charges. Wrongful conviction can occur when: The judge has misdirected the jury, the judge
makes mistakes in their legal rulings such as wrongly excluding or including evidence, failure
to call the relevant witnesses, or present relevant evidence, Jury irregularities (for example
researching the case on the on the internet). In the case of the Birmingham six, 6
inndividuals were accused of bombing a pub whcih left 21 people dead and another 200
injured. The six were arrested, five were Belfast born and John Walker was born in Derry.
The six men were charged with murder and conspiracy to cause explosions. Forensic
scientist Dr Frank Skuse used positive griess test results to claim that Hill and Power who
were a part of the six had handled explosives. All six spent 16 years in prison, where they
were treated poorly, for example the Police would pay other members in prison even though
the Police had even told them they knew they didn't do it, just arrested them to keep the
public happy. After an appeal which showed new evidence of police fabrication and
suppression of evidence, the Birmingham six were freed after the case was quashed by the
court of appeal.
Double jeopardy
Previously, an individual who had been acquitted of an offence could not be tried for the
offence again, this was known as the double jeopardy rule. However, in 2003 the double
jeopardy rule was changed. There are positives to the rule such as that it stops people from
being put on trial again and again for the same crime. This means the accused does not
have to go through the strain and stress of trial after a verdict has already been reached.
However, there are also some major negatives to the rule. For example double jeopardy can
cause tremendous problems for the prosecution. They must always be sure about their case
before they begin; essentially they get only one shot at successfully prosecuting the accused
person. Also double jeopardy still holds even if new evidence is uncovered. This has caused
problems in a number of cases, where there has been plenty of evidence against a person,
Verdicts
Safe verdicts mean a verdict that is reached on the basis of all relevant facts of the matter
after a fair trial. To achieve this the evidence must be admissible, reliable and credible, as
well as sufficient to justify the verdict and court procedures must have been followed
correctly during the trial. Unsafe verdicts can occur when there are problems with the
evidence or the trial process. This can then cause a miscarriage of justice where a
defendant is convicted of a crime they did not commit. The verdict is usually appealed and
overturned by the Court of Appeal. This mainly happens on the basis of new evidence. The
innocence project was founded in 1992 and attempts to exonerate the wrongly convicted
through DNA testing and reforms the criminal justice system to prevent future injustice. In
the case of Herman Atkins, he was wrongly charged of robbery and rape. Following the
rape, the victims clothing, including the sweater wiht semen stains, was collected and
marked for identification. The semen swabs were developed by someone with blood type A,
which is Atkins typing. The victim was also shown a photo lineup where she identified Atkins
as her assailant. He served 12 years in prison but was later exonerated after the innocence
project ran tests on three separate areas of the victims sweater and in all areas, the results
excluded Atkins.
Convictions
A wrongful conviction essentially means the person convicted is factually innocent of the
charges. Wrongful conviction can occur when: The judge has misdirected the jury, the judge
makes mistakes in their legal rulings such as wrongly excluding or including evidence, failure
to call the relevant witnesses, or present relevant evidence, Jury irregularities (for example
researching the case on the on the internet). In the case of the Birmingham six, 6
inndividuals were accused of bombing a pub whcih left 21 people dead and another 200
injured. The six were arrested, five were Belfast born and John Walker was born in Derry.
The six men were charged with murder and conspiracy to cause explosions. Forensic
scientist Dr Frank Skuse used positive griess test results to claim that Hill and Power who
were a part of the six had handled explosives. All six spent 16 years in prison, where they
were treated poorly, for example the Police would pay other members in prison even though
the Police had even told them they knew they didn't do it, just arrested them to keep the
public happy. After an appeal which showed new evidence of police fabrication and
suppression of evidence, the Birmingham six were freed after the case was quashed by the
court of appeal.
Double jeopardy
Previously, an individual who had been acquitted of an offence could not be tried for the
offence again, this was known as the double jeopardy rule. However, in 2003 the double
jeopardy rule was changed. There are positives to the rule such as that it stops people from
being put on trial again and again for the same crime. This means the accused does not
have to go through the strain and stress of trial after a verdict has already been reached.
However, there are also some major negatives to the rule. For example double jeopardy can
cause tremendous problems for the prosecution. They must always be sure about their case
before they begin; essentially they get only one shot at successfully prosecuting the accused
person. Also double jeopardy still holds even if new evidence is uncovered. This has caused
problems in a number of cases, where there has been plenty of evidence against a person,
