AC3.2 Draw conclusions from information (15
marks)
Specification Requirements
Content Amplification
Conclusions Learners should develop skills to analyse
information, in order to draw conclusions based on
● Just verdicts reasoned evidence.
● Miscarriage
In their controlled assessment response,
● Safe verdict learners should make reference to the
assignment brief and other examples they have
● Just sentencing studied.
1
, Just Verdicts
What is a just verdict?
Jurors are told to reach a verdict that is both fair and just, but some verdicts have lacked justice and
fairness in the eyes of the law therefore they are considered “unjust”. In order for a verdict to be just it
must be impartial and consider all the information and evidence given as well as any circumstances
that surround the case, this will make it fair. The jury includes laypersons, who can be susceptible to
external factors such as the media and biases. In some cases it can take years for a just verdict to be
reached.
Case study of a just verdict: Stephen Lawrence
Stephen Lawrence was murdered in April 1993. It was an unprovoked attack, he was stabbed to death
by a young white gang while waiting at the bus stop. After the murder several residents provided the
names of the suspects and a note was left on a telephone box with the name of the 5 suspects. Luke
Knight, David Norris, Jamie and Neil Acourt and Gary Dobson. However no arrests were made.
Lawrence’s family complained that the police were not doing enough. Police arrested the 5 suspects
but the charges were dropped due to insufficient evidence. Some people believed that the
investigation was corrupt due to the relationship between detectives and the gang members.
After new forensic evidence was found Dobson and Norris faced trail of the murder of Stephen. On
January 3rd 2012 they were found guilty. This verdict is unjust because despite the 5 men being
identified by Duwanye Brooks and being charged with the murder only two of them are serving life
sentences while the other suspects of the murder have never faced justice. After perseverance and
campaigns by Lawrence’s family Gary and David were found guilty. This was 19 years after the
lengthy investigation, this investigation involved professional incompetence, institutional racism and a
lack of leadership. To begin with it took the police two weeks to make any arrests despite numerous
residents making identifications. This meant the murderers had time to destroy key evidence like the
clothes they were wearing. The original investigation didn’t convict those responsible and the
campaign for justice led by Lawrence’s family led to a public enquiry. The large amount of time it took
to reach justice, and the fact that not all those involved in the murder were convicted means the verdict
is unjust.
Miscarriage of Justice
What is a miscarriage of justice?
2
marks)
Specification Requirements
Content Amplification
Conclusions Learners should develop skills to analyse
information, in order to draw conclusions based on
● Just verdicts reasoned evidence.
● Miscarriage
In their controlled assessment response,
● Safe verdict learners should make reference to the
assignment brief and other examples they have
● Just sentencing studied.
1
, Just Verdicts
What is a just verdict?
Jurors are told to reach a verdict that is both fair and just, but some verdicts have lacked justice and
fairness in the eyes of the law therefore they are considered “unjust”. In order for a verdict to be just it
must be impartial and consider all the information and evidence given as well as any circumstances
that surround the case, this will make it fair. The jury includes laypersons, who can be susceptible to
external factors such as the media and biases. In some cases it can take years for a just verdict to be
reached.
Case study of a just verdict: Stephen Lawrence
Stephen Lawrence was murdered in April 1993. It was an unprovoked attack, he was stabbed to death
by a young white gang while waiting at the bus stop. After the murder several residents provided the
names of the suspects and a note was left on a telephone box with the name of the 5 suspects. Luke
Knight, David Norris, Jamie and Neil Acourt and Gary Dobson. However no arrests were made.
Lawrence’s family complained that the police were not doing enough. Police arrested the 5 suspects
but the charges were dropped due to insufficient evidence. Some people believed that the
investigation was corrupt due to the relationship between detectives and the gang members.
After new forensic evidence was found Dobson and Norris faced trail of the murder of Stephen. On
January 3rd 2012 they were found guilty. This verdict is unjust because despite the 5 men being
identified by Duwanye Brooks and being charged with the murder only two of them are serving life
sentences while the other suspects of the murder have never faced justice. After perseverance and
campaigns by Lawrence’s family Gary and David were found guilty. This was 19 years after the
lengthy investigation, this investigation involved professional incompetence, institutional racism and a
lack of leadership. To begin with it took the police two weeks to make any arrests despite numerous
residents making identifications. This meant the murderers had time to destroy key evidence like the
clothes they were wearing. The original investigation didn’t convict those responsible and the
campaign for justice led by Lawrence’s family led to a public enquiry. The large amount of time it took
to reach justice, and the fact that not all those involved in the murder were convicted means the verdict
is unjust.
Miscarriage of Justice
What is a miscarriage of justice?
2
