AC 3.1 (1.20)
Evidence and validity
● E in criminal cases- usually reliable
● Occasions where E hasnt been valid- lead to miscarriages of justice
● Direct E can be W testifying direct recollection of events
● Circumstantial E- when W cannot tell you directly about the fact that is intended to be
proved (allows someone to draw reasonable inference)
Case study 1
Jeremy Bamber:
○ No forensic E- All circumstantial E
○ Convicted killing 5 members of family- remote essex farm house (1985)
○ Pleaded innocence 25 yrs
○ P case- in the middle of night JB used silencer to murder family
○ His defence- sister (Sheila) history of suffered severe mental illness+hospitalised
with schizophrenia used fathers guns
○ Police initially- case of murder suicide (Sheilla, killed family+herself)
○ Silencer changed police opinion- couldn't kill herself+put away silencer (blame put on
JB)
○ E originally secured guilty verdict- scratch marks allegedly created weapon from
argument between JB+father Nevill
○ New E (from Britians leading forensic experts) suggested marks made after murders
took place
○ No marks in photo from crime scene
○ GF (Julie Mugford) Unhappy in relationship, wanted JB to commit (planned to start
new relationship)
○ JM W statements- claimed he’d told her he’d hired hitman (Mathew Mcdonald
○ Contradicted previous statement- Mathew found innocent)
○ Statement in court- claimed mathew said he’d shot Neill 7 times (what media said,
actually 8)- Jury unable to reach verdict from statement
● Biases- GF may have held grudge (rejected marriage+other woman)
● Judge MR Justice Drake ‘wrapped+evil beyond belief’
● Accuracy-News of world offered 25K before trial for JM story if guilty verdict
● Checkbook Journalism- paying for fake story
● Opinions (unreliable/valid?)- JM claimed he’d hired hitman for £2,000 (found
innocent)
● Circumstances- High profile case (police under pressure to convict/solve)
● No Forensic E- police relied on circumstantial E
● Currency-Silencer found 3 day later by cousin
● Argued JB framed family- inherited familys money
Judgment:
● Little E that points to verdict being valid
● Lack of validity for E- all circumstantial E
● E that lead to conviction (scratch marks) proven incorrect
● Accuracy for E questionable (change in statements-silencer potentially planted?)
Case study 2
, Expert evidence:
● Reliable- experts in field/highly tained/trusted by juries
● Good validity- they should be objective/daw on E of experience
● Isnt guaranteed- can make mistakes (miscarriages of justice/damage reputation)
Sally Clark+Roy Meadows:
○ Convicted murder killing her 2 babies
○ Sir Roy Meadows (pediatrician) gave expert opinion
○ Gave wrong statistic- lead to conviction
○ 1 in 73 million chance- 2 children dying of sudden infant death syndrome
○ Given incorrect statistics in similar cases
○ Jury accepted E as he was medical expert
○ Overwhelming E- child died lung infection
○ SC released after 3 yrs in prison- following appeal hearing (deemed conviction
unsafe)
● Accuracy- RM used wrong calculations for statistic
● Acquittal/other cases shows Statistical E- unreliable/lacked validity
● Circumstances-No EWT/forensic E (lack of valid E)
● Wasn’t mathematician
● Bias+opinion- Jury opinions swayed by expert witness (lay people/lack legal
knowledge)
● Technical/hard to understand (statistics)- Jury more likely to trust EW ‘blinded by
science’
● Lots of EW are correct- highly trained/experts in field (opinion should be
valid/reliable)
● ‘One sudden death is tradgedy, two is suspicious, 3 is murder until proved
otherwise’- biased
● Currency- used same statistic as previous similar cases (similar- not the same/not
current)
Judgment:
● Lack of E- should’ve been convicted (appeal)
● EW usually valid- human error
● Statistic shouldve been checked- caused multiple miscarriages justice (Staticical E
invalid)
Eyewitness testimony as evidence
W/Testimonal- validity affected:
● Mistaken identity (findings of Innocence Project)
● Memory erosion
● Leading Q’s
● Discussion of events with others-Loftus+Palmer
● Weapon focus
● Interpretation of events
Ronald Cotton:
○ July 1984- assailant broke into Jennifer Thompso-Cannino apartment
○ 10 yrs prison- rape+burglary didnt commit
Evidence and validity
● E in criminal cases- usually reliable
● Occasions where E hasnt been valid- lead to miscarriages of justice
● Direct E can be W testifying direct recollection of events
● Circumstantial E- when W cannot tell you directly about the fact that is intended to be
proved (allows someone to draw reasonable inference)
Case study 1
Jeremy Bamber:
○ No forensic E- All circumstantial E
○ Convicted killing 5 members of family- remote essex farm house (1985)
○ Pleaded innocence 25 yrs
○ P case- in the middle of night JB used silencer to murder family
○ His defence- sister (Sheila) history of suffered severe mental illness+hospitalised
with schizophrenia used fathers guns
○ Police initially- case of murder suicide (Sheilla, killed family+herself)
○ Silencer changed police opinion- couldn't kill herself+put away silencer (blame put on
JB)
○ E originally secured guilty verdict- scratch marks allegedly created weapon from
argument between JB+father Nevill
○ New E (from Britians leading forensic experts) suggested marks made after murders
took place
○ No marks in photo from crime scene
○ GF (Julie Mugford) Unhappy in relationship, wanted JB to commit (planned to start
new relationship)
○ JM W statements- claimed he’d told her he’d hired hitman (Mathew Mcdonald
○ Contradicted previous statement- Mathew found innocent)
○ Statement in court- claimed mathew said he’d shot Neill 7 times (what media said,
actually 8)- Jury unable to reach verdict from statement
● Biases- GF may have held grudge (rejected marriage+other woman)
● Judge MR Justice Drake ‘wrapped+evil beyond belief’
● Accuracy-News of world offered 25K before trial for JM story if guilty verdict
● Checkbook Journalism- paying for fake story
● Opinions (unreliable/valid?)- JM claimed he’d hired hitman for £2,000 (found
innocent)
● Circumstances- High profile case (police under pressure to convict/solve)
● No Forensic E- police relied on circumstantial E
● Currency-Silencer found 3 day later by cousin
● Argued JB framed family- inherited familys money
Judgment:
● Little E that points to verdict being valid
● Lack of validity for E- all circumstantial E
● E that lead to conviction (scratch marks) proven incorrect
● Accuracy for E questionable (change in statements-silencer potentially planted?)
Case study 2
, Expert evidence:
● Reliable- experts in field/highly tained/trusted by juries
● Good validity- they should be objective/daw on E of experience
● Isnt guaranteed- can make mistakes (miscarriages of justice/damage reputation)
Sally Clark+Roy Meadows:
○ Convicted murder killing her 2 babies
○ Sir Roy Meadows (pediatrician) gave expert opinion
○ Gave wrong statistic- lead to conviction
○ 1 in 73 million chance- 2 children dying of sudden infant death syndrome
○ Given incorrect statistics in similar cases
○ Jury accepted E as he was medical expert
○ Overwhelming E- child died lung infection
○ SC released after 3 yrs in prison- following appeal hearing (deemed conviction
unsafe)
● Accuracy- RM used wrong calculations for statistic
● Acquittal/other cases shows Statistical E- unreliable/lacked validity
● Circumstances-No EWT/forensic E (lack of valid E)
● Wasn’t mathematician
● Bias+opinion- Jury opinions swayed by expert witness (lay people/lack legal
knowledge)
● Technical/hard to understand (statistics)- Jury more likely to trust EW ‘blinded by
science’
● Lots of EW are correct- highly trained/experts in field (opinion should be
valid/reliable)
● ‘One sudden death is tradgedy, two is suspicious, 3 is murder until proved
otherwise’- biased
● Currency- used same statistic as previous similar cases (similar- not the same/not
current)
Judgment:
● Lack of E- should’ve been convicted (appeal)
● EW usually valid- human error
● Statistic shouldve been checked- caused multiple miscarriages justice (Staticical E
invalid)
Eyewitness testimony as evidence
W/Testimonal- validity affected:
● Mistaken identity (findings of Innocence Project)
● Memory erosion
● Leading Q’s
● Discussion of events with others-Loftus+Palmer
● Weapon focus
● Interpretation of events
Ronald Cotton:
○ July 1984- assailant broke into Jennifer Thompso-Cannino apartment
○ 10 yrs prison- rape+burglary didnt commit
