Opinion Evidence: Graat V. The Queen

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.

Police officers are faced each day with a vast array of situations with which they must deal. No two situations they encounter are ever the same, even when examines a large number of situations over an extended period of time. The officers are usually in the position of having to make decisions on how to handle a specific matter alone, or with little additional advice and without immediate supervision. This is the heart of police discretion. As we shall find, the exercise of discretion by police has benefits and problems associated with such exercise. The unfettered use of discretion can

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.

Forensic evidence plays a huge role in most criminal cases. After the Daubert trial, forensic scientific evidence was reevaluated in criminal and civil cases. Scientific and forensic types of evidence can be extremely helpful in proving the case. It can help identify the suspect in a criminal case. That will help put a criminal in prison. There are many different types of forensic evidence that can be considered as scientific evidence. The different types include DNA matching, fingerprint identification, and hair evidence. The methods used to show these types of evidence are usually beyond the scope of knowledge that judges and juries know. Those types of forensic evidence are usually introduced as scientific evidence. Scientific evidence can sometimes be omitted from a courtroom or

Along with senses, evidence I believe is very straightforward when dealing with how we know. Without evidence the court system would not be able to

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

The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has made some controversial decisions in key cases in Canada’s past. When looking at the Canadian Founders intent for Canadian Federalism, many scholars argue that the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council has done a bad job following the founders’ intentions and intentionally decentralized Canada. The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council did fail in keeping in line with what the founders intended for Canada and may have even intentionally set out to decentralize the Canadian government, but this does not mean it had a negative impact on Canada. There are a number of cases that were seen by the JCPC that played a vital role in the decentralization of the Canadian government, yet

In 1692 in Salem, Massachusetts was the setting for an infamous American witchcraft. It was the years when people are plagued with superstitions and monstrous fears that spawned witch-hunts on both sides of the Atlantic. That also maintains a wide witch panic that was a product of a community undergoing severe religious and cultural change. Besides, the Puritans had lost the royal charter that had allowed them to govern their colony free from interference by the mother country. The result was that many leaders and citizens began to see satanic conspiracies at work that eroded the cherished institutions of their already shaky society.

This is crucially important because it gives guidelines as to what evidence can be used in trial, and it keeps irrelevant facts from being introduced, which can confuse a jury change the outcome of a trial (Universal Class). There are so many distinct types of evidence that are allowed in court, but the most common are the following: demonstrative evidence, exculpatory evidence, physical evidence, and testimony. Demonstrative evidence has any representation of an object and is a form of common proof. Exculpatory evidence is a broader term meaning any evidence that gives favor to the defendant (Universal Class). One of the most scientific involved forms of evidence is pure physical evidence, which is any real evidence or material evidence that plays a role in the trial.

Officer Raymond’s reason for stopping Mr. Jackson’s car was objectively reasonable. Therefore, because of the reasonable interpretation, this proves reasonable suspicion was present.

These are classified as evidence as they outline data or hard facts. Also supporting the claim by stating researched ‘truth’ including proof of expertise.

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 .

There are many tangible circumstances that tend to prove or disprove some facts in all criminal or civil cases. Under rule 41(b) “A warrant may be issued under this rule to search for and seize any (1) property that constitutes evidence of the commission of a criminal offenses; or (2) contraband, the fruits of a crime, or things otherwise criminally possessed; or (3) property designed or intended for use or which is or has been used as the means of committing a criminal offense; or (4) person for whose arrest there is probable cause, or who is unlawfully restrained” (John N. Ferdico, 1999). Evidence is one of the single most important pieces of a criminal trial. It is used to determine a defendant’s guilt or innocence.

Evidence plays a major role usually in trail of a case. Several types of evidence can be used. Evidence can be divided into two categories – Testimonial evidence and Physical evidence. Physical evidence is one type of such evidence; this evidence can be brought to court room for observation during trails. This is the most important evidence. Physical evidence is also known as real evidence, they consist tangible article from tiny microscopic to macroscopic evidence from large building to molecules in air. It can be in solid, gas or liquid form. Advances in forensic science have increased the use of physical evidence

In the second part of the following essay I will be nominating one source of evidence that is present at the scene of a scenario. I will be discussing in my own words how Police should collate, handle and analyse the piece of evidence in a Criminal Investigation. In doing this I will be using relevant crime scene powers, NSWPF operational guidance and making reference to the Horswell (2004) reading.