Evidence is an integral detail in any legal case, evidence is what determines the length of sentence and evidence is what sways any jury. But can the presumable presented documentation be completely trusted in all cases? Misrepresented facts are common in the courtroom as well as in the world. No revision within the criminal justice system, and the lack of strict procedures and high standards are producing an arena for faulty facts. It is essential that the judicial system develop a more trustworthy protocol for evidence and that the community keeps informed.
What is evidence and why is it important to be factual? Evidence in a legal proceeding is essentially what establishes the crime, it's the most important step to get correct because, it affects the subject on
…show more content…
There have been several accounts written about just that. As reported by the English 2 Course Reader where these accounts are produced, the victims of misidentifications tell their stories. One inmate and subsequent victim of misidentification named James Newsome was able to tell his story from the outside of prison after being released for a crime he didn't commit. His case as told by him and witnesses of the brutality he faced was the exemplary situation encompassing all the possible mistakes a criminal system can make—lack of DNA testing when the lawyer's office didn't allow a scientist to test Newsome’s fingerprints, racial influenced prejudice when the police in Chicago first set their sights on two black men then targeted Newsome because of his location in Chicago, and after arresting Newsome the three witnesses who were to testify that they saw him murder the shop worker were instructed by police prior to one witness testimony. Unfortunately, the case was put to trial based on the testimonies of the witnesses, which emphasizes just how fragile and malleable memories can
The criminal trial process aims to provide justice for all those involved, while it succeeds in the majority of cases, it effectiveness is influenced and reduced by certain factors. These include the legal representation involved in a case and the availability of legal aid, the capacity of the jury assessing the trial, the credibility of scientific evidence and the impact of social media on the trial process. Due to such flaws the criminal trial process is not always an effective means of achieving justice.
Forensic science and law are often seen as two opposing disciplines; forensic science is often presumed to be factual and law can be interpreted in multiple ways. Science and law reach conclusions in different ways which is an issue. Due to these differences, miscommunication is often the cause for miscarriages of justice. In order to address this problem, people working in the criminal justice system should have more knowledge of forensic science. There are many factors that contribute to the lack of understanding between forensic science and the people involved in the court process. Firstly, the adversarial model will be discussed in relation to how these procedures prevent effective communication between forensic evidence and lawyers. Secondly, the role that expert witnesses play in the presentation of scientific evidence and how jurors play a role in interpreting their evidence, will be considered. Thirdly it will be argued that lawyers and judges lack adequate knowledge of forensic science that is needed to conduct accurate trials. Lastly, possible solutions to improve the communication between forensic science and the actors involved in the criminal justice system. Juries, lawyers and judges should be more educated in understanding forensic science.
Now a day’s evidence can change a person’s life in the blink of an eye. “People were often punished for crimes based on the word of one or two individuals, with little concern given to sorting out the truth of the affair” (Hunter 12). But today a person must be tried and some physical evidence is needed in order for a person to be convicted of a crime.
Circumstantial evidence is probably one of the biggest ethical concerns when people are being convicted of crimes. Circumstantial evidence is: “Evidence not bearing directly on the fact in dispute but on various attendant circumstances from which the judge or jury might infer the occurrence of the fact in dispute”. (Dictionay.com, 2010). Many
Everyday, people are arrested for crimes they have committed. However, the justice system, in some cases, has failed to convict and arrest the right person. Innocent people have been sent to jail based upon the deliberate misidentification of suspects. Throughout U.S history, there have been several famous wrongful convictions such as the Scottsboro Boys and Ed Johnson (Grimsley). Their convictions were based on race due to the racial strife from the Jim Crow era. Base on David Love’s article, many convictions after the Jim Crow era were still being caused by misleading identification from eyewitness claims of the suspects being African Americans. Due to the advancement of forensic and DNA technology, lack of evidence from previous convictions
“Wrongful convictions happen every week in every state in this country. And they happen for all the same reasons. Sloppy police work. Eyewitness identification is the most- is the worst type almost. Because it is wrong about half the time. Think about that.” (Grisham). Wrongful convictions can happen to anyone, at anytime. Grisham implies wrongful convictions happen for the same reasons, careless police work as well as eyewitness identification. An eyewitness identification is a crucial aspect in detective work because it essentially locates the person at the crime scene. This is the worst cause of wrongful convictions because it is wrong half the time.
Evidence may be different in each class but it still has the same objective. For example, in accounting in order for us to figure out one’s assets and liabilities we have to focus on the numbers which help lead us to a conclusion. In this class the evidence we look at is the law. We analyze certain portions of the law to figure out whether a person is guilty of committing the crime. In law evidence is essential to proving whether a person is innocent or guilty. Evidence can be anything like a fingerprint, blood, hair trace, etc it will help lead us to a
In the justice system, the verdicts are not always fair as innocent people are convicted of crimes they did not commit. Over the years, there have been innovative ways to overturn a conviction by providing new evidence. The lack of evidence or the coerce evidence against a subject can lead to their wrongful conviction. Many believe that having video recordings of interrogations will prevent the wrongful decisions, yet it is a disadvantage as the camera is focused on the offender. This is due to the causation discovered between the focus point of the video and the final verdict in court cases. These findings demonstrate illusory causation and how it plays out in the courtroom.
In the United States criminal justice system, people are considered innocent until proven guilty. It is the job of the prosecution to “overcome the defendant’s presumption of innocence.” (Storm, 2012, p. 75) This is also referred to as the burden of proof (or proof beyond a reasonable doubt) in a criminal prosecution. Specifically, it means “the obligation to prove a disputed charge, allegation, or defense.” (Storm, 2012, p. 74) Two components of the burden of proof are the burden of production (presenting evidence to the judge or jury) and the burden of persuasion (convincing the judge or jury). (Storm, 2012, p. 75) Proof beyond reasonable doubt “is determined by examining the quality and quantity of the evidence presented.”
Behind every court case there’s a train of forensic science evidence and research. Forensic science is the application of scientific principles of criminal justice. In many court cases a forensic scientists is the one on the scene collecting finger prints, photos, blood samples and other evidence. Unfortunately one of the controversial issues in the forensic world is the evidence and its lack of verification of its reliability. In the field of forensics there are issues in finding proof in generating conclusion, fundamental knowledge to solve problems, and the whole false memory defense in the court. These issues can be solved in many ways like extensive research, preparation and training. These issues
The causes of wrongful convictions are easy to identify: irregularities and incompetence at the investigatory, pre-trial, trial and appellate stages of the criminal justice system. More particularly, Kaiser identifies the following contributory factors, among others: false accusations, misleading police investigative work, inept defense counsel, misperceptions by Crown prosecutors of their role, factual assumption of an accuser’s guilt by actors in the criminal justice system, community pressure for a conviction, inadequate identification evidence, perjury, false confessions, inadequate or misinterpreted forensic evidence, judicial bias, poor presentation of an appellate case, and difficulty in having fresh evidence admitted at the appellate stage. Each instance of determined wrongful conviction illustrates a different combination of failures in the criminal justice system that has
The idea of law and order in this country isn’t a new one and, in fact, has taken a very long time to get to the point it is today. But it isn’t done changing or improving because with every new advancement and technology law must adapt to encompass these new gray areas and make them clear in the court of law. An example of a few large milestones in United States’ law that reflect such adaptability are the Federal Rules of Evidence; Federal Rules for Civil Procedure; and the Sedona Conference. Each of these milestones have made clear many issues and gray areas in the law. Issues in evidence collection and presenting as well as digital evidence collection are a few of the many subjects covered in these federal rules.
May and Powles view evidence as ‘something’ which tends to prove or disprove something else. In the context of a trial this consists of information placed before the court for the purpose of proving or disproving facts in issue. Beecher-Monas states that in a system based on the rule of law and which aspires to ‘truth’, the accuracy and reliability of such information is essential. The mechanisms available to the court to determine the latter, centre on the presentation of evidence under oath, cross-examination and the observation of witness demeanour .
In today’s society there are rules that define evidence pertaining to a defendant’s trial. These rules are defined as the “The Rules of Evidence” or “The Law of Evidence.” These rules create a safe and orderly environment, promote efficiency, and enhance the quality of evidence that pertain to all criminal trials. These rules restrict what a jury can and cannot hear or see, details of the law, and the importance of the effective performance of the law enforcement officer. Americans are well aware of the rules that govern evidence; but what are they, what do they mean, how do they apply to each case, and how are they broken down.
Evidence is the key element in determining the guilt or innocence of those accused of crimes against society in a criminal court of law. Evidence can come in the form of weapons, documents, pictures, tape recordings and DNA. According to the American Heritage College dictionary, evidence is the documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law (476). It is shown in court as an item of proof, to impeach or rehabilitate a witness, and to determine a sentence. This paper will examine two murder cases, O.J. Simpson and Daniel Taylor.