Entrapment in South Africa

This essay will attempt to explain a watershed moment using the Sarah’s Law as an example. The main objective will be to observe how this law improved society using academic research and what improvements that can be provided with the law to help in the future towards treatments of victims and witnesses. This essay will highlight how Sarah’s Law was created and how it made a huge impact in the criminal justice system, as well as, the ways the law helped victims and witnesses in society today.

The purpose of this report is to discuss the matter The Queen V Bayley, which took place on the 29th of September 2012. Adrian bailey (serial rapist) was found guilty on charges of murder and rape, this report will discuss in detail the court proceedings that lead up to the imprisonment of Adrian Bayley and also the events prior to the kidnapping of Jill Meagher. The purpose of this report is to discuss the purpose of law in our society and how it applies to people who commit crimes in our community. As well as the purpose of criminal law in our community.

This essay argues that the traditional definition of crime has many shortcomings, and attempts to show, why some criminologist would prefer to use the social harms perspective over that of crime. One of the most commonly accepted definitions of crime is ‘an act that is capable of being followed by criminal proceedings’ (Williams, 1955, p.107). Therefore, criminal behaviour “is (a) intentional act in violation of the criminal law” (Tappan 1947 pg100). However, there are issues with the concept of crime. Firstly, the legal and state definition of harmful behaviours and practices focuses too much on individualistic forms of criminality. it also ignores the wrongdoings of governments and large businesses. There is also the problem of power dynamics,

Over the years, the nature of policing has changed and developed drastically. Their role not only entails crime fighting and emergency response, but also social enforcement and social peacekeeping. Bound by a code of ethics, this highly demanding role asks police to remain professional in their dealings with society, and ensure they uphold the law impartially and fairly. When it comes to enforcing the law, it is important to look at the methods and approaches taken by police in order to combat crime, and whether or not they meet current ethical standards. Although this may be the case, it is also important to acknowledge that aspects of police culture such as loyalty, deception and protection of colleagues will ultimately shape the nature of approach to resolving crime, gaining helpful information and protecting fellow officers. Police officers are granted large amounts of discretion within their roles, however, when officers deliberately abuse this amount of discretion and become display misconduct, it becomes challenging to limit discretionary authority of police officers because of the frequent circumstances they encounter where deception may provide highly constructive outcomes. Throughout this essay, methods used by police officers including entrapment, wiretapping and planting of evidence will be assessed for their strengths and weaknesses. Furthermore, the ethical standards of these methods and approaches will be assessed as to whether or not they prove as ethically

Police have the power to investigate crimes, make arrests, interrogate suspects and gather evidence against the accused. Using their powers under the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act (2002) (NSW), police arrested Jessica Silva on the day she committed the offence, 13 May 2012 as they had reasonable grounds to suspect she committed the murder. She was shortly charged with the murder of James Polkinghorne. Police then conducted an interrogation which was recorded in an ERISP of an interview with the accused. The offence was most likely reported on the day by the accused or an eyewitness and Silva was immediately taken into custody. This report most likely came from calling the police on the emergency 000 number. The police also used their powers to investigate the crime in order to be sufficient enough to present a case against the accused in court. The gathering of evidence in this case involved the taking of eye witness statements, statements from those involved including Silva, her brother and her father, and taking photos of the crime scene. It is important that this evidence is obtained carefully and not tampered with, otherwise it would be inadmissible. The police have used technology in investigating the crime through the phone tapping of Polkinghorne’s phone, and the seizing of the SMS messages sent between Silva and Polkinghorne prior to the murder. The phone taps were admissible as they were obtained legally with a warrant, despite being for the investigation of a separate offence. The police were allowed to arrest and detain Silva on the 13 May 2012 because they had reasonable grounds that she committed the illegal offence. The police must issue her a caution, stating why they have arrested her and that if she were to say something it could be used in court against her. The interrogation or asking of questions was

The right to a fair trial. It protects society from injustice and separates the guilty from the innocent. Without this human right, law and order in society would not be as fair as it is today, however, in some cases this right was not given. Six convicts from Adelaide, South Australia were found guilty and sentenced to jail due to the evidence given by Doctor Colin Manock, a Forensic Pathologist. This essay will discuss in detail the six convicts cases and if they were given the right to a fair trial. Also whether or not they should have been convicted based from the forensic and scientific evidence given during their trial by Doctor Colin Manock (FairTrials.org, 2015).

The role of the judge in the adversary system of trial, unlike the inquisitorial counterpart, has less involvement in the establishment of facts and the analysis of evidence in cases brought before the court. In the inquisitorial system of trial, the judge has a much more active role in relation to the handling and evaluation of evidence, and where relevant, can actually cross examine and question witnesses if they feel crucial evidence may have been missed. While the inquisitorial system of trial has a seemingly more intrusive judge, having an added legal expert questioning and raising areas where evidence may have been missed, is a significant improvement over a judge who may know evidence has been missed but cannot intervene such is the

``In criminal law, confession evidence is a prosecutor’s most potent weapon’’ (Kassin, 1997)—“the ‘queen of proofs’ in the law” (Brooks, 2000). Regardless of when in the legal process they occur, statements of confession often provide the most incriminating form of evidence and have been shown to significantly increase the rate of conviction. Legal scholars even argue that a defendant’s confession may be the sole piece of evidence considered during a trial and often guides jurors’ perception of the case (McCormick, 1972). The admission of a false confession can be the deciding point between a suspect’s freedom and their death sentence. To this end, research and analysis of the false confessions-filled Norfolk Four case reveals the

Throughout history, there has been many different times, all with different highs and lows. However, no matter which Era, certain problems always seem to shine through the cracks. This problem is usually caused by the sole culprit of crime. Crime is the largest problem in most times. Every time has its own crime; and therefore, every generation deals with crime differently, each using their own type of punishment and order. Also, each Era has had its own way to carry out the punishments. Oftentimes it had been through officials of crime. Though different generations have had it’s own special ways of dealing with this problem of law and order, one stands alone with its majesty and uniqueness: The Elizabethan Era. This Era had a very particular, somewhat violent, way to deal with it’s crime and terrors. The strange crimes, the frightening punishments, and the peculiar officials of crime from the Elizabethan Era were very different from the ones of today.

Both Oliver v. State and DePasquale v. State discuss the use of entrapment, an excuse that argues that government agents get people to commit crimes they wouldn’t otherwise commit. In Oliver, the defendant was convicted of larceny from the person; an officer disguised as a vagrant was slumped against a tree, pretending to be asleep with a ten-dollar bill sticking out of his pocket. Oliver approached the officer to warn him that he would be arrested if he did not move; upon shaking the officer, Oliver stepped away but then noticed the protruding ten-dollar bill, which he took. As a result, he was sentenced to ten years’ imprisonment. Upon appeal, Oliver’s sentence was reversed because it was determined that he had been entrapped and that

For the public, a shocking judgement has arised from the Supreme Court of Canada on Hart’s trial—a man accused of drowning his three-year-old twin daughters. The Court ruled that videotaped confessions were inadmissible and the murder charges against Nelson Hart would be withdrawn due to insufficient evidence. For such a heartbreaking loss, the conclusion of this case seems confusing at best. However, with examination into the tactics used by undercover officers in an attempt to secure Hart’s confession, the Court uncovers injustice and emotional manipulation which disputes the legitimacy of the operation.

Although there are not victims in this type of crime, there is nevertheless a threat to the public interest in some cases of these crimes. There is therefore a formal legal framework to prevent or prohibit such crimes.

Many of the contemporary issues in South Africa can easily be associated with the apartheid laws which devastated the country. The people of South Africa struggle day by day to reverse “the most cruel, yet well-crafted,” horrific tactic “of social engineering.” The concept behind apartheid emerged in 1948 when the nationalist party took over government, and the all-white government enforced “racial segregation under a system of legislation” . The central issues stem from 50 years of apartheid include poverty, income inequality, land ownership rates and many other long term affects that still plague the brunt of the South African population while the small white minority still enjoy much of the wealth, most of the land and opportunities

Victimisation is the process of learning the various ways that authority figures determine who is a victim, while also educating the person on how to become the victim. Secondary victimisation, also known as double victimisation refers to the way the state responds to victimisation. The states response has the potential to add further burdens on to the victim. Three main components of the criminal justice system will be focused on in this paper; these are enforcement, adjudication and punishment. This paper will identify why the criminal justice system tend to commit secondary victimisation towards the victims. It will also discuss the pains of victimisation and how secondary victimisation has the ability to amplify these pains. The paper will also identify reforms that have been put in place in order to minimise the occurrence of secondary victimisation.

According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights article 11, “Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defense” (Claiming Human Rights). This right to the presumption of innocence is a basic human right, which everyone is entitled to because a human right is a right one has because one is human. However, in some cases people do not presume ‘innocent until proven guilty’ perspective, rather their thinking is the opposite, ‘guilty until proven innocent’. This is illustrated in the case of Denice Haraway, who one day disappeared from her job at a convenience store in Ada, Oklahoma. The police took off on a relentless mission to capture the person(s) responsible for this heinous act and, they did everything in their power to bring someone or anyone to justice, which they did when they arrested Tommy Ward and Karl Fontenot. Even though they repeatedly said they were innocent, but everyone including the police believed them to be responsible because they ‘confessed’ to committing the crime, a confession based on a dream. This paper will illustrate the reasons that are relevant to the innocence of these two men. The one factor that is persisted throughout this case is the incompetent efforts of the law enforcement such as inadequate efforts on the crimes scenes leading to lost of evidence, not following proper protocol in