To Prove An End To The Not Proven “That bastard verdict” in the words of Sir Walter Scott is how he characterised the ‘not proven’ verdict that litters the Scottish courtroom. That very real verdict that allowed the already convicted serial rapist of a young mother to walk free , that very real, very real verdict. This almighty black hole in the Scottish Legal system that’s “skewing the justice system in the favour of the accused” , allowing both summery and solemn criminal trials to be concluded with one of three verdicts: one of conviction (‘guilty’) and two of acquittal (‘not guilty’ and ‘not proven’) The ‘not proven’ verdict uses the ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ evidence claws and should ‘those on the indictment or complaint’ be found to …show more content…
These problems have been highlighted by Sheriff Maciver who stated in a government document that “There is absolutely no doubt that the existence of a third verdict causes confusion for juries…this is a real problem which regularly requires to be dealt with” This view is echoed by the Victim Support Scotland who further call the ‘not proven’ verdict “confusing” This shambolic verdict has now also been described as “illogical, confusing and potentially stigmatising. ” It is now time for the legal hierarchy to surly concede that the ‘not proven’ verdict has passed its sell by date and needs to be removed from Scotland’s already crumbling out of date legal …show more content…
No. Calls to rid Scotland of its legal “demon child” have long gained support. From the 60,000 strong petition in the wake of the damming Amanda Duffy trail , to more recently the Scottish Labour party backing the initial abolition proposal in 2007 but yet eight years later this verdict remains. It is time to back our MSP’s and relinquish Scots law of its “bastard verdict” and let Scots law prosper and flourish unchained from its 18th century
This illustrates the refusal of the rights of victims and the inevitable denial of justice for society. The coronial inquest that was conducted in 2011, corrected some of the initial issues with the investigation. Before the inquest, vital DNA evidence was disposed of, as a result of human error, which meant that the likely suspect could not be identified. As a result of human error the inquest provided some form of justice for society but due to how late it was conducted the family did not receive justice
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.
Just and equitable legal outcomes to evaluate the case include of many expectations that may be met, the outcome of the case was discovered by fair trial which includes correct punishment theories and procedures, Justice Roslyn Atkinson met these through the trial also making it equitable because the punishment theories were applied to the offender Brett Peter Cowan. Punishment options and procedures in Queensland met the current needs of the society throughout this
The government had to play a role in Thomas and Jane Weirs’ trials because they are the authority figures that tend to convict people of their misdemeanours. “After both Dittays were read and found relevant by the Justices, the King’s Advocate caused interrogate the Major judicially anent his Guilt…the King’s Advocate takes Instruments that he refuses to answer positively.” The trial itself is a testament to the workings of the government, parliament and authority figure of Scotland in the case of witch hunting of men and women.
If that does not occur to the reader as an issue than factoring in the main problem of the topic where innocent people die because of false accusation will. In addition, this book review will include a brief review of the qualifications of the authors, overview of the subject and the quality of the book, and as well as my own personal thoughts on the book. In the novel Actual Innocence: When Justice Goes Wrong and How to Make It Right authors Barry Scheck, Peter Neufeld, and Jim Dwyer expose the flaws of the criminal justice system through case histories where innocent men were put behind bars and even on death row because of the miscarriages of justice. Initially, the text promotes and galvanizes progressive change in the legal
Syme, D. (1997). Martin Bryant's Sentence- What the judge said, Retrieved 5 July, 2003, from http://www.geniac.net/portarthur/sentence.htm. 7. The Australian Encyclopaedia.
The legal system is considered a place where justice is served and criminals are sent to prison. However, this is not always the case, as seen with Robert Baltovich, who suffered a serious miscarriage of justice. Baltovich was accused and unfairly convicted for a murder that he did not commit. The investigation into the murder of Elizabeth Bain was unfairly skewed to gain a conviction against Baltovich. The bias against Baltovich, in the murder investigation, and his subsequent trial was a disservice to him and to Canadian society.
In the United States, jury trials are an important part of our court system. We rely heavily on the jury to decide the fate of the accused. We don’t give a second thought to having a jury trial now, but they were not always the ‘norm’.
... of Kafka’s The Trial and brings to light some of the frightening realities of the legal system during the early to mid 20th century. Whether it is the inaccessible court or lawyers, or the complete disregard for evidence and documentation. Even if some of the fault lies in the accused for not understanding the system, many trials in this period reflected poor practices of justice particularly so in the case of Bukharin and Dreyfus. Kafka’s work truly encapsulates the legal system both before and after The Trial was written incredibly effectively. It gives a clear idea as to the how miscarriages of justice can occur and what changes had to be made to the legal system in order resolve these issues. It is perhaps arguable that the courts today still face some of these issues and that Kafka’s work is still relevant in determining some of our legal principles today.
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.
A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.
The twenty-first century judicial system goes back in time to solve murders in the past. Many high school students before they proceed to college will read the play Macbeth written by William Shakespeare, this play like many have very relatable universal themes such as greed, relationships, and good versus evil. If the play Macbeth was applied in today’s judicial system for killing Duncan the prosecutor would have to look at all the angels of the crime right down to the motivates and the purpose of what drove him to commit the murder.
Garrett, Brandon. Convicting the Innocent: Where Criminal Prosecutions Go Wrong. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2011. 86. Print.
Convictions. Now Juries Expect the Same Thing – and That's a Big Problem.” U.S. News
“We are blessed in the united kingdom by a judiciary whose integrity, dependence, professional-ism and skill that is not in question. But we take such a condition for granted at our peril. Justice is a delicate plant. It has to be ruptured, protected, cared for” Straw, Jack (July, 2007).