3.1 Examine information for validity
Evidence
When examining evidence, it is key to consider that the magistrates or jury has the verdict to decide
upon validity of the evidence brought forward by the defence or prosecution.
Evidence can be non-admissible on many occasions, especially could be if the evidence given is
hearsay or given because of reasons like threat. These are not admissible as they have been either
forced or could be untrue evidence which can change the verdicts fate. The court must also decide if
evidence is reliable and make good judgement to how accurate the evidence may be. They might do
this by comparing two accounts of a situation or deciding how dramatized the event could be. The
court finally must decide if the evidence is believable, deciding if the evidence is credible can is
extremely important as in circumstances of a witness account, they must have taken an oath upon
entry of the court and have sworn to tell the truth, so if they have told false evidence then they
might serve longer as this is a crime in itself.
Eyewitness testimony can have its disadvantages due to the evidence being stored and reliable to
the witness, this gives vacancy to distortion of the memory and focus during the events. Distortion
can happen due to being in such a high adrenaline moment you might forget or create small changes
in what happened. For example, studies ca show that lighting, distance of the event, weapon focus
and duration can change how you see an event and if you even notice the offender’s facial
appearance at all or if you were just focusing on the offender’s weapon or actions. Memory is
malleable as the information perceived by a person is stored as a memory and when needed the
retrieval of the memory, to complete such tasks as be called up to identify the offender.
Expert Evidence is someone specialised and who can offer more information and advice upon
subjects linked to the case and they normally know more than a legal professional.Their opinions can
be favoured strongly which may or may not change the outcome of the case. However, it has been
found in the past that inaccurate expert evidence can lead to miscarriages of justice.
Expert testimony often involves interpreting forensic evidence using their specialist knowledge to
supposedly give more accurate outcomes. However major problems can be made if basic procedures
cannot be completed, a example of this could be Adam Scott, who was wrongly accused of rape. He
was a victim of forensics error and regulator finds, he ended up spending months on remand after a
technician failed to complete basic procedures. Even though he had been 100 miles away from the
scene of the crime they still put him in custody.
Trial transcripts are complete and exact written records of court cases. Personnel called
stenographers now digitally record every case, depending on which court the case is held in. They
can be useful to use during appeals as they can recall everything which has previously happened and
can be used by the parole board during sentencing remarks of the judge. Transcripts are extremely
valid as it is not an interpretation of an event or memory, but it is a hard copy of what happened
with no distortion. However, there is the possibility of a mechanical error, or the quality of language
used or human error.
Evidence
When examining evidence, it is key to consider that the magistrates or jury has the verdict to decide
upon validity of the evidence brought forward by the defence or prosecution.
Evidence can be non-admissible on many occasions, especially could be if the evidence given is
hearsay or given because of reasons like threat. These are not admissible as they have been either
forced or could be untrue evidence which can change the verdicts fate. The court must also decide if
evidence is reliable and make good judgement to how accurate the evidence may be. They might do
this by comparing two accounts of a situation or deciding how dramatized the event could be. The
court finally must decide if the evidence is believable, deciding if the evidence is credible can is
extremely important as in circumstances of a witness account, they must have taken an oath upon
entry of the court and have sworn to tell the truth, so if they have told false evidence then they
might serve longer as this is a crime in itself.
Eyewitness testimony can have its disadvantages due to the evidence being stored and reliable to
the witness, this gives vacancy to distortion of the memory and focus during the events. Distortion
can happen due to being in such a high adrenaline moment you might forget or create small changes
in what happened. For example, studies ca show that lighting, distance of the event, weapon focus
and duration can change how you see an event and if you even notice the offender’s facial
appearance at all or if you were just focusing on the offender’s weapon or actions. Memory is
malleable as the information perceived by a person is stored as a memory and when needed the
retrieval of the memory, to complete such tasks as be called up to identify the offender.
Expert Evidence is someone specialised and who can offer more information and advice upon
subjects linked to the case and they normally know more than a legal professional.Their opinions can
be favoured strongly which may or may not change the outcome of the case. However, it has been
found in the past that inaccurate expert evidence can lead to miscarriages of justice.
Expert testimony often involves interpreting forensic evidence using their specialist knowledge to
supposedly give more accurate outcomes. However major problems can be made if basic procedures
cannot be completed, a example of this could be Adam Scott, who was wrongly accused of rape. He
was a victim of forensics error and regulator finds, he ended up spending months on remand after a
technician failed to complete basic procedures. Even though he had been 100 miles away from the
scene of the crime they still put him in custody.
Trial transcripts are complete and exact written records of court cases. Personnel called
stenographers now digitally record every case, depending on which court the case is held in. They
can be useful to use during appeals as they can recall everything which has previously happened and
can be used by the parole board during sentencing remarks of the judge. Transcripts are extremely
valid as it is not an interpretation of an event or memory, but it is a hard copy of what happened
with no distortion. However, there is the possibility of a mechanical error, or the quality of language
used or human error.
