Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Digital evidence important to an investigation
Digital evidence important to an investigation
Uses of digital evidence
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Digital evidence important to an investigation
ISCUSSION PAPER ON THE REVIEW OF THE LAW OF EVIDENCE, DEALING WITH HEARSAY, RELEVANCY AND ADMISSIBILTY OF ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE IN CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS
Summary
The purpose of this paper is to review how documentary evidence and electronic evidence, which is treated as a form of documentary evidence, is used in criminal proceedings in Australia1 with the view to make some suggestions for possible adoption as recommendations to the Uniform Act for effective application in criminal trials. The aim is to maintain an efficient and effective justice system in which a clear and comprehensive laws of evidence play a fundamental role
Introduction
The law of Evidence in Australia is a mixture of statute and common-law together with rules of the court. Based on the complex role documentary evidence plays in criminal trials there is the need to examine the process of gathering
…show more content…
As defined under the dictionary of the Evidence Act 1995 (Cth) a previous representation means a representation made or otherwise than in the course of giving evidence in the proceedings in which the evidence of the representation is being sought to be adduced. This covers the time of when the events were witnessed up until the trial. In addition, it also includes an account made during previous legal proceedings, statements made by the witness other than during the course of their testimony. Section 59(1) uses the term ‘intended to assert’ and in response to the term the Australian Law Reform Commission amended the legislation to include s 2A. S. 59(2A) states that in determining whether it can be reasonable supposed that the person intended to assert a particular fact by the representation, the court may have regard to the circumstances in which the representation was made. Therefore, the party wishing to submit the previous representation into evidence is required to prove that the representation is not intended to assert the particular
The conviction of guilty offenders when adhering to the guidelines of the NSW criminal trial process is not difficult based on the presumption of innocence. However, due to features of the criminal trial process, established by the adversarial system of trial, cases can often involve copious amounts of time and money, particularly evident in the case of R vs Rogerson and McNamara where factors such as time and money are demonstrated to be in excess. In addition, characteristics of the adversarial system such as plea bargaining has the power to hinder convictions due to the accused having the authority to hire experienced and expensive lawyers to argue their case, hence maintaining their innocence.
From the aforementioned cases, it is evident to see that the Australian legal system has not always been fair and just, however, over time it has been shaped and moulded to clearly represent what is now considered to be fair and just in our society. From the procedures and presumptions of how the legal system is administered to the law and regulations which determine what is the crime and punishment – these are based on the transparency, equality, freedom from bias, human rights, and established set of rules adhere to the justice and fairness of the legal system.
The Crown gave notices pursuant to ss 97 and 98 of the Evidence Act (EA) 2008 (Vic), intending to lead the Evidence against the appellant at trial. The trial judge ruled that the coincidence evidence was admissible but the tendency evidence was inadmissible.
McCormick, Charles T. Handbook of the law of evidence. 2nd ed. St. Paul: West Publishing Co., 1972. Print.
If handled with care the evidence can be the best assistance to the crime investigator and can be used as a major proof in court. To improve the investigation any detective or expert has to admit the necessity of the non-movable items observation and processing apart from the regular movable evidence collection.
R N Howie and P A Johnson, Annotated Criminal Legislation NSW, 2011-2102, (Lexis Nexis Butterworths 2012) 17769-1774
This concept now embedded in the Federal Rules of Evidence can trace its philosophical underpinnings in prerevolutionary England. Before the 17th century, English courts had very few limitations on what evidence could be admitted into court.3 This court system, which was created in the wake of Norman invasion in 1066, did not ...
Subsequently, one of the main components of the procedural limitation is innocent until proven guilty, which brings about the right to a Grand Jury- a panel that determines whether or not there is a need to go to trial. As a result, a guilty verdict in criminal cases is determined with evidence that is sufficient and that must be proved “‘beyond a reasonable doubt’” (pg.131), so there is an immense need to increase the chances for the respect of “reasonable doubt” (pg.
The use of evidence and witnesses is a mechanism in which the law attempts to balance the rights of victims and offenders in the criminal trial process. Evidence used in court are bound by the Evidence Act 1995 (NSW) and have to be lawfully obtained by the police. The use of evidence and witnesses balance the victims’ rights to a great extent. However, it is ineffective in balancing the rights of offenders. The law has been progressive in protecting the rights of victims in the use and collection of evidence and witness statements. The Criminal Procedure Amendment (Domestic Violence Complainants) Bill 2014, which amends the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, passed the NSW Legislative Council on 18 November 2014. The amendment enables victims of
The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.
Judges make rulings on what evidence may or may not be admitted over the course of a trial and technology impacts the way police collect and process evidence, this is true today as well as during the 1892 trial of Lizzie Borden. The rudimentary practice of evidence collection and processing by police was a critical factor in the acquittal of Lizzie Borden. Fingerprinting had not been introduced into the court system and the absence of an eyewitness left the prosecution with little to work with, this left the prosecution only circumstantial evidence but most if not all of it pointed at the defendant. The Borden home was absent of any signs of forced entry and the traditional signs of a struggle couldn’t be located during the police examination but several gruesome facts indicated Lizzie Borden may have been innocent. Medical evidence as to the method used in the killings pointed toward a “tall man” being the culprit, specifically the nineteen wounds inflicted on Abby Borden were said to have been from a dull edge of an axe.
In this position paper I have chosen Bloodsworth v. State ~ 76 Md.App. 23, 543 A.2d 382 case to discuss on whether or not the forensic evidence that was submitted for this case should have been admissible or not. To understand whether or not the evidence should be admissible or not we first have to know what the case is about.
There are four sources of Law in the Australian Legal System. They are Statute Law, which is made in Parliament, Common Law and the Law of E...
The collection, custody and preservation of forensic evidence is a vital aspect of evidence integrity, without proper adherence to these procedures, crucial evidence that could potentially have great impact on a court case could be rendered useless. In the case of criminal proceedings, a skilled defence lawyer will look to scrutinise every step taken by forensic practitioners’ involved within the case in regards to the continuity of the evidence, in doing this they attempt to undermine the practitioner’s ability to properly carry out strict evidence collection, protection and preservation procedures and also look to find fault in the techniques they used to carry out these procedures.
The purpose of criminal justice system is to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt and for this purpose forensic evidence has apparently played a major role. But looking at the present scenario, it can be observed that the basic purpose or rather the advantage of forensic evidence over other evidences seem to have been rendered as defeated. As the certainty, which was offered by such evidence is not fully reliable and has been construed wrongly by the courts. Hence it can be observed from above mention points that forensic science has failed in providing a better administration of criminal justice system.