AC 2.4 Writing Frames
Evidence:
The CPS requires the prosecution to have gathered a sufficient amount of
evidence before a trial can take place, meaning that they have the ‘burden of
proof’ in the trial. This means they must use their evidence to prove to the
defence that the defendant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. On top of this, the
jury take an oath which states that they will reach a true verdict according to the
evidence that is presented. This means that evidence has a very big influence
over the outcome criminal cases.
Physical evidence can be the most conclusive and strongest form of evidence.
For example, DNA evidence such as hairs and saliva are extremely reliable
because every individual has unique DNA. Meaning that if it is found at a crime
scene, it can be used to accurately identify someone that was there during the
crime. This can be an advantage when using evidence to reach a guilty verdict
as it is undisputable. One case that demonstrated the advantage of DNA
evidence is in the case of Colin Pitchfork. He was the first murderer convicted
using DNA fingerprinting. Furthermore, DNA profiling allowed police to prove the
initial main suspect, Buckland, to be innocent as his DNA did not match that of
the killers.
However, evidence that is not handled correctly can have a very negative impact
on the overall verdict of a case. Since evidence, especially physical, has such a
high reputation of being reliable, juries will often trust it without a second
thought. However, this means that when it is wrong, there is a very high chance
of a miscarriage of justice. For example, in the case of Amanda Knox, the
evidence collected at the crime scene was not examined in the correct ways,
causing pieces to become cross-contaminated, such as the victim’s DNA ending
up on the same knife that had been held by Knox. This influenced the judgement
made which declared Knox as guilty of murder, when she was in fact innocent.
Overall, I think evidence has a huge impact on the outcome of criminal cases
because its definitive nature makes it difficult to contradict. However, it is
important to ensure that all evidence used in a trial is admissible to enable the
verdict to be just.
Media:
An example of a key influence that can affect the outcome of a criminal case is
media. When cases are published in newspapers and on social media, they are
often over-dramatized to attract readers. The media can also make judgements
on whether suspects are guilty or not and make their crimes appear more
severe. As jurors are random members of the public, there is a high chance that
they will have been exposed to these news stories prior to the trial. Research
from Cheryl Thomas found that 1/5 of jurors had already been exposed to media
stories about the case in high profile trials. This means that their opinions will
have already been influenced by what they have read, which could follow
through into their verdict during the trial. If there has been widespread media
coverage on a certain suspect, portraying them as guilty or innocent, this is
known as a trial by media.
Media can have positive influences on the overall outcome of criminal cases, for
example, by raising awareness, such as in the case of Sarah Payne who was
Evidence:
The CPS requires the prosecution to have gathered a sufficient amount of
evidence before a trial can take place, meaning that they have the ‘burden of
proof’ in the trial. This means they must use their evidence to prove to the
defence that the defendant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. On top of this, the
jury take an oath which states that they will reach a true verdict according to the
evidence that is presented. This means that evidence has a very big influence
over the outcome criminal cases.
Physical evidence can be the most conclusive and strongest form of evidence.
For example, DNA evidence such as hairs and saliva are extremely reliable
because every individual has unique DNA. Meaning that if it is found at a crime
scene, it can be used to accurately identify someone that was there during the
crime. This can be an advantage when using evidence to reach a guilty verdict
as it is undisputable. One case that demonstrated the advantage of DNA
evidence is in the case of Colin Pitchfork. He was the first murderer convicted
using DNA fingerprinting. Furthermore, DNA profiling allowed police to prove the
initial main suspect, Buckland, to be innocent as his DNA did not match that of
the killers.
However, evidence that is not handled correctly can have a very negative impact
on the overall verdict of a case. Since evidence, especially physical, has such a
high reputation of being reliable, juries will often trust it without a second
thought. However, this means that when it is wrong, there is a very high chance
of a miscarriage of justice. For example, in the case of Amanda Knox, the
evidence collected at the crime scene was not examined in the correct ways,
causing pieces to become cross-contaminated, such as the victim’s DNA ending
up on the same knife that had been held by Knox. This influenced the judgement
made which declared Knox as guilty of murder, when she was in fact innocent.
Overall, I think evidence has a huge impact on the outcome of criminal cases
because its definitive nature makes it difficult to contradict. However, it is
important to ensure that all evidence used in a trial is admissible to enable the
verdict to be just.
Media:
An example of a key influence that can affect the outcome of a criminal case is
media. When cases are published in newspapers and on social media, they are
often over-dramatized to attract readers. The media can also make judgements
on whether suspects are guilty or not and make their crimes appear more
severe. As jurors are random members of the public, there is a high chance that
they will have been exposed to these news stories prior to the trial. Research
from Cheryl Thomas found that 1/5 of jurors had already been exposed to media
stories about the case in high profile trials. This means that their opinions will
have already been influenced by what they have read, which could follow
through into their verdict during the trial. If there has been widespread media
coverage on a certain suspect, portraying them as guilty or innocent, this is
known as a trial by media.
Media can have positive influences on the overall outcome of criminal cases, for
example, by raising awareness, such as in the case of Sarah Payne who was
