Victims of crime have been known to be underrepresented in Australian criminal justice processes (Baldry et al. 2013). In order to resolve this issue a number of reforms have been introduced with the aim to allow the victim greater involvement in criminal justice processes; for example the introduction of the Victim Impact Statement (VIS) allows victims an opportunity to be included in court processes (Israel 2017, p. 525). However, this essay argues that some victims of crime, specifically victims with intellectual disabilities, are still underrepresented during criminal justice processes despite these reforms. One example of such underrepresentation is shown through the current policy initiative of cross-examination; this process is not effective …show more content…
This essay focuses on one criminal justice process, cross-examination, to allow a narrower scope of evaluation on the contemporary approaches aimed at repairing this particular issue. In 2014, Bowden, Henning and Plater approached the practice of cross-examination and stated that ‘it could lead to unreliable evidence and further trauma to the victim’ (p.539); the unreliable evidence could be due to a number of reasons but mostly from the victim’s possible unintentional misunderstanding of questions, misremembering of events after the incident and also heightened anxiety from the experiences of being involved with the criminal justice system (pp. 540-541). Additionally, Bowden, Henning and Plater suggest that direct cross-examination become replaced with video recording ahead of time conducted by a third party for victims with intellectual disabilities (2014, p. 539). Furthermore, Nair, advocates that traditional cross-examination question/answer formats are usually confusing and intimidating to intellectually disabled witnesses and therefore courtrooms should allow ‘vulnerable witnesses’ to give evidence in narrative form (2010). These developing contemporary approaches to address cross-examination issues largely consist around methods to reduce the victim’s possible misunderstanding, heightened anxiety and misremembering of events …show more content…
295).
While there were some negative responses to pre-recording the cross-examinations of victims, such as difficulty for the jury to maintain concentration during a long video and also the inability for the jury to see the defendant’s immediate reaction during cross-examination, the overall response to the test from the people involved was positive. Nair’s suggestion of allowing victims to use a narrative form is based upon evidence from a study by Agnew and Powell (2004, p. 290) that found some victims that were children with or without intellectual disabilities, give more accurate evidence when in a narrative form (2010, p. 482-483). While there is limited evidence on the use of this approach, it would eliminate the possibility of the victim misunderstanding the questions during cross-examination; a factor which is usually caused by the formal dialog used by legal professionals (Garbett 2017). The effectiveness of these approaches is shown through the evidence that they minimise the amount of anxiety felt by victims with intellectual disabilities, reduce the chances of misremembering
Be summing up, victims have a vital role to play in bringing criminal to justice. By having the courage to stand up and be a witness you can prevent further crimes happening and protects others from becoming a victim. And as many criminal justice official acknowledge that victims are central to effective crime investigation and prosecution. Although several initiatives have been developed to make court more friendly to witnesses; and there is still a need for them to be more responsive to the wellbeing victim’s family and all that concerns them and not just the victim.
In many nation states, it is noticed that there is a disproportionate number of black people especially those youngsters going through the criminal justice system. The overrepresentation is illustrated by related data released by the U.S. Department of Justice and the House of Commons Home Affairs Committee. In America, almost 3500 per 100,000 residents of the black male were sent to jail in 2013 which was over seven times more than the ratio their white counterpart had and in England and Wales, 8.5% of young black people aged between 10-17 were arrested during the same period .This essay aims to explore the reasons behind the ethnic overrepresentation in the criminal justice system and believes that the higher rate of offending for some race groups and the existence of systematic racist which partially stems from the contemporary media distortion are attributive to the overrepresentation.
This paper will consider eye witness testimony and its place in convicting accused criminals. Psychology online (2013) defines “eye witness testimony” as a statement from a person who has witnessed a crime, and is capable of communicating what they have seen, to a court of law under oath. Eye witness testimonies are used to convict accused criminals due to the first hand nature of the eye witnesses’ observations. There are however many faults within this system of identification. Characteristics of the crime is the first issue that will be discussed in this paper, and the flaws that have been identified. The second issue to be discussed will be the stress impact and the inability to correctly identify the accused in a violent or weapon focused crime. The third issue to be discussed is inter racial identification and the problems faced when this becomes a prominent issue. The fourth issue will be time lapse, meaning, the time between the crime and the eye witness making a statement and how the memory can be misconstrued in this time frame. To follow this will be the issue of how much trust jurors-who have no legal training-put on to the eye witness testimony, which may be faltered. This paper references the works of primarily Wells and Olsen (2003) and Rodin (1987) and Schmechel et al. (2006) it will be argued that eye witness testimony is not always accurate, due to many features; inter racial identification, characteristics of the crime, response latency, and line up procedures therefore this paper will confirm that eyewitness testimonies should not be utilised in the criminal ju...
The criminal justice system takes on a pivotal role in pursuing and preventing crimes in society. When a suspect is caught and then faced with charges for a violent crime, they legally have the right to a fair trial. In order for a criminal proceeding to successfully take place, the defendant must be fully aware of their surroundings, have a basic understanding of court procedures, as well as being capable of defending their one case. Competency to stand trial (CST) is essential for maintaining fairness in the courtroom and producing a just verdict. However, if a defendant is unable to understand legal proceedings due to mental illness or impairment, they must be thoroughly assessed and evaluated before declared incompetent to stand trial. Carrying out a case with a defendant who lacks mental capacity causes numerous issues because the individual is incapable of supplying their lawyers with information regarding their crime or any of the witness testimonies at trial. Lack of comprehensible communication between a defendant and attorney forces an ineffective defense in the case. Mental disturbances in the defendant that may cause disorderly conduct in the court room are considered disruptive and weaken the authority of the legal system. Supreme Court cases that have dealt with competency to stand trial issues over the years have made significant rulings, which have stressed the importance of identifying whether or not a defendant is in fact incompetent.
If given this prompt at the beginning of this semester I would have answered with a resounding yes, the criminal justice system is racist. The classes I have previously taken at LSU forced me to view the criminal justice system as a failed institution and Eric Holder’s interview in VICE - Fixing The System solidified that ideology. The system is man-made, created by people in power, and imposed on society, so of course there will be implicit biases. The issue is that these internally held implicit biases shaped the system, leading the racial and class disparities. VICE – Fixing The System addressed heavily the outcomes that we see in today’s society based on these implicit biases. Additionally, this documentary focuses on the ways that mainly
“Most modem sentencing systems in the United States express an explicit commitment to ensuring that a defendant 's sentence is not affected by the defendant 's race or gender (Hessick, 2010).” Even though individuals are protected through the Bill of Rights and Sentencing Reform Acts, there are still disparities in sentencing within the criminal justice systems. Often, race and gender bias negatively affects sentencing.
Sentencing disparity refers to the differences in sentences that are passed down in the same instances. This can happen on a variety of fronts. It can occur with judges, in different states, states v. federal, different prosecutors, among different victims, etc. (Criminal – Sentencing…2017 p.4) A more specific definition from USLegal.com states that, “Sentence disparity refers to an inequality in criminal sentencing which is the result of unfair or unexplained causes, rather than a legitimate use of discretion in the application of the law.”. There are a variety of ways that sentencing disparity affects the justice system. There are three factors that disparity looms around; they are gender disparity, racial disparity, and age disparity. (4
There has been considerable debate worldwide, regarding the accuracy of eyewitness testimony in the criminal justice system. Particularly, arguments have surrounded wrongful convictions that have resulted from incorrect eyewitness evidence (Areh, 2011; Howitt, 2012; Nelson, Laney, Bowman-Fowler, Knowles, Davis & Loftus, 2011). The purpose of this essay is to consider psychological research about the accuracy of eyewitness testimony and its placement in the criminal justice system. Firstly, this essay will define how eyewitnesses and their testimonies are used within the criminal justice system and the current debate surrounding its usage. Secondly, the impact of post-identification feedback will be used to show the affect on the confidence of a witness. Thirdly, studies around gender related differences will show how a witnesses gender can affect memory recall and accuracy. Fourthly, empirical studies will be used to highlight how a psychological experience called change blindness can cause mistakes in eyewitness identification. Finally, the effect of cross-examination will be used to explore the impact on eyewitness accuracy. It will be argued, that eyewitness testimony is not accurate and highly subjective, therefore, the criminal justice system must reduce the impact that eyewitness testimony is allowed to have. Developing better policies and procedures to avoid wrongful convictions by misled judges and jury members can do this.
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 media plays a huge role in forming people's perceptions of crime. Without the media we would remain ignorant to occurrences outside our direct social groups. The media and especially news coverage therefore provides us with an important point of contact with the rest of society. In evaluating its effect on popular perceptions of crime it becomes important to consider where most of the information comes from and how representative it is on actual criminality. If it takes "facts" (the truth, the actual event, a real thing) or if it is heightened to a crime myth. With a myth being based upon "exaggeration" or heightening of "ordinary" events in life. Crime myths become a convenient mortar to fill gaps in knowledge and to provide answers to question social science either cannot answer or has failed to address. Myths tend to provide the necessary information for the construction of a "social reality of crime (Quinney, 1970)." As crime related issues are debated and re debated, shaped and reshaped in public forms, they become distorted into myth, as largely seen in the mass media.
The novel Witness for the Defense: The Accused, the Eyewitness, and the Expert Who Puts Memory on Trial goes into great detail about the encounters an expert witness, on memory especially, might come across by telling true stories from Dr. Elizabeth Loftus’s experiences with the help of Katherine Ketcham. It also provides information about Loftus’s work and research on memory and its limitations and malleability (Loftus & Ketcham, 1991). Applying research on memory to this novel allows one to better understand the implications of the prosecutor’s case more effectively. The first story told in Witness for the Defense is the one involving Steve Titus.
The United States criminal justice system is an ever-changing system that is based on the opinions and ideas of the public. Many of the policies today were established in direct response to polarizing events and generational shifts in ideology. In order to maintain public safety and punish those who break these laws, law enforcement officers arrest offenders and a judge or a group of the law offender’s peers judge their innocence. If found guilty, these individuals are sentenced for a predetermined amount of time in prison and are eventually, evaluated for early release through probation. While on probation, the individual is reintegrated into their community, with restrict limitations that are established for safety. In theory, this system
The criminal justice system is composed of three parts – Police, Courts and Corrections – and all three work together to protect an individual’s rights and the rights of society to live without fear of being a victim of crime. According to merriam-webster.com, crime is defined as “an act that is forbidden or omission of a duty that is commanded by public law and that makes the offender liable to punishment by that law.” When all the three parts work together, it makes the criminal justice system function like a well tuned machine.
The Impact of victims of crime have long been considered to be overlooked when it comes to the criminal justice system. It is common for victims of crime to feel powerless and without a voice in the criminal justice system. However, since 1980 Australian victims have had the chance to be heard through a document called a Victim Impact Statement, giving the victims a chance to tell the courts about the effect that the crime has burdened on them individually, physically and emotionally as well as their families and friends as a society.
Throughout the past decades, Māori has been heavily over-represented in the New Zealand criminal justice system. Māori is significantly more likely to be disadvantaged by various risk factors which are linked to criminal offending behaviours. This is not a new phenomenon towards indigenous people as it is a long-standing, wicked problem, with origins in the discriminatory colonial practices. Based on Statistic New Zealand, Maori are 15 percentage of the New Zealand population and yet Maori accounted for 42 percent of apprehensions, 34.5 percent of convictions and 50.8 percent of all inmates in 2009. This essay will discuss the events and factors that have led to New Zealand having an overrepresentation of Maori within the criminal justice system.