AC2.4 Assess key influences affecting the outcomes of criminal cases
Evidence
The evidence in a trial should have the main impact on the outcome. Each jury member
takes an oath (or affirmations) traditionally as follows:
I swear by almighty God that I will faithfully try the defendant and give a true verdict
according to the evidence.
The evidence must be only that presented in court in the form of physical or testimonial
evidence. It is up to each jury member or each magistrate to attach whatever weight they
consider appropriate to each piece of evidence.
In the law of England and Wales, the prosecution must bring evidence to prove the claim
they are making, this is known as the burden of proof. The standard of proof, in criminal
matters, is beyond a reasonable doubt or until the jury or magistrate are sure of the verdict.
If there is any doubt, there must be an acquittal. The defence does not have to prove
anything, although in practice they will try to cast as much doubt as possible on the
evidence.
Media
The media can affect the outcome of a criminal case. If a story is published, the public will
read it and could believe that the material printed is true, even if it is not. This may mean
that a suspect does not get a fair trial. Under English law, a person is innocent until proven
guilty, but if a jury has a preconceived idea from media reports, this could affect the
outcome of a trial. This is what is meant by 'trial by media' rather than a trial by jury on the
evidence presented in the courtroom.
Case study
Christopher Jefferies – was arrested and interviewed by the police in connection with the
murder of Joanna Yeates in 2010. However, he found himself the subject of a media frenzy,
appearing on the front page of the national newspapers. He was described as 'weird', 'lewd',
'strange', 'creepy', 'angry', 'odd', 'disturbing', 'eccentric', 'a loner' and 'unusual' in just one
article. Jefferies was, however, innocent and Vincent Tabak, Joanna's neighbour, was jailed
for life in October 2011 after being convicted of her murder. The newspapers were forced to
issue a public apology and paid substantial libel damages to Jefferies.
Witnesses
Both the prosecution and the defence are entitled to call witnesses in support of their case.
If the witness evidence can be agreed and is not in dispute, it can be read out in court in the
form of a statement. This prevents the witnesses from having to attend the court and give
evidence. However, if the witness evidence is contested, the witness must appear in court
to give their side of the story, which is called examination-in-chief. Witnesses can also be
asked questions by the other side or cross-examined. The jury are entitled to give as much
weight as they consider appropriate to witness evidence. So, if the witness is believable, this
could influence the jury towards whichever side the witness represents. Similarly, if the
witness appears to be unreliable, they may adversely affect the outcome of a case.
Evidence
The evidence in a trial should have the main impact on the outcome. Each jury member
takes an oath (or affirmations) traditionally as follows:
I swear by almighty God that I will faithfully try the defendant and give a true verdict
according to the evidence.
The evidence must be only that presented in court in the form of physical or testimonial
evidence. It is up to each jury member or each magistrate to attach whatever weight they
consider appropriate to each piece of evidence.
In the law of England and Wales, the prosecution must bring evidence to prove the claim
they are making, this is known as the burden of proof. The standard of proof, in criminal
matters, is beyond a reasonable doubt or until the jury or magistrate are sure of the verdict.
If there is any doubt, there must be an acquittal. The defence does not have to prove
anything, although in practice they will try to cast as much doubt as possible on the
evidence.
Media
The media can affect the outcome of a criminal case. If a story is published, the public will
read it and could believe that the material printed is true, even if it is not. This may mean
that a suspect does not get a fair trial. Under English law, a person is innocent until proven
guilty, but if a jury has a preconceived idea from media reports, this could affect the
outcome of a trial. This is what is meant by 'trial by media' rather than a trial by jury on the
evidence presented in the courtroom.
Case study
Christopher Jefferies – was arrested and interviewed by the police in connection with the
murder of Joanna Yeates in 2010. However, he found himself the subject of a media frenzy,
appearing on the front page of the national newspapers. He was described as 'weird', 'lewd',
'strange', 'creepy', 'angry', 'odd', 'disturbing', 'eccentric', 'a loner' and 'unusual' in just one
article. Jefferies was, however, innocent and Vincent Tabak, Joanna's neighbour, was jailed
for life in October 2011 after being convicted of her murder. The newspapers were forced to
issue a public apology and paid substantial libel damages to Jefferies.
Witnesses
Both the prosecution and the defence are entitled to call witnesses in support of their case.
If the witness evidence can be agreed and is not in dispute, it can be read out in court in the
form of a statement. This prevents the witnesses from having to attend the court and give
evidence. However, if the witness evidence is contested, the witness must appear in court
to give their side of the story, which is called examination-in-chief. Witnesses can also be
asked questions by the other side or cross-examined. The jury are entitled to give as much
weight as they consider appropriate to witness evidence. So, if the witness is believable, this
could influence the jury towards whichever side the witness represents. Similarly, if the
witness appears to be unreliable, they may adversely affect the outcome of a case.
