Unit 3 AC2.4- Assess key influences affecting the outcome
of criminal cases
● 45 minutes total, 10 minutes each, pick 4 (or however many question asks for) (10 marks)
● Evidence, media, witnesses, experts, politics, judiciary and barristers & legal teams
● Use a case for each influence
● Make clear and detailed understanding of the impact
Evidence
● Before a charge is brought by the CPS, the case must pass the evidential test to demonstrate there is a
realistic prospect of a successful prosecution
● In England and Wales, the prosecution must provide evidence to prove the claim they are making, this is
known as the burden of proof- the proof must be beyond reasonable doubt or until the jury/magistrates
are sure of the verdict.
● Jurors are more swayed by a confession made by the defendant, even if there is evidence suggesting it
was coerced or when a judge instructs the jury to discount it
● Jurors also tend to place high currency on testimonial evidence, especially eyewitness testimonies, to
be an accurate account of events
○ Testimonial evidence can help to understand the sequence of events, and can also give
supplements and strengths to other evidence available
○ However testimonial evidence can be biassed, corrupt or influenced by other factors resulting in
miscarriages of justice
■ Case study: Ronald Cotton was convicted of raping a woman because she claimed it
was definitely him and spotted him in a line up and some more tests. Although Cotton
did not commit the crime, the jury convicted him due to the high confidence of the
woman who falsely accused him. Her recollection may have been impaired due to the
time of day or the fact that people tend to differentiate people of the same race as them
better than other races. This highlights how evidence can negatively affect the outcome
of a case because the victim’s flawed testimony meant Cotton experienced a
miscarriage of justice as he served 10 years for another's crime.
● Jurors also place a high degree of trust in forensics and DNA evidence as they perceive it as scientific
and infallible
○ Physical evidence provides a tangible object for the jury to see which cannot be distorted by the
defendant, experts can test the evidence and then give their opinion for/against a prosecution in
court
○ However, experts may disagree in court leading the jury being confused or swayed in a
particular direction
■ This may affect the outcome of a trial as it can delay the process, or the jury may be
convinced by one side of the court although they could be incorrect in their opinion.
○ Additionally, evidence can be flawed and subject to contamination
■ Case study: Adam Scott was falsely accused of raping a woman because a technician
failed to discard the petri dish that already had Scott's DNA on when testing for the
woman's attacker. Because the evidence was scientific, the jury was compelled to
believe Scott was the attacker although he had an alibi, phone records showed he was
far from the area and the physical evidence was the only evidence implying he was the
culprit. This shows how evidence can negatively affect the outcome of a case as it can
lead to unsafe trials and wrongful convictions since Scott was charged for the crime.
of criminal cases
● 45 minutes total, 10 minutes each, pick 4 (or however many question asks for) (10 marks)
● Evidence, media, witnesses, experts, politics, judiciary and barristers & legal teams
● Use a case for each influence
● Make clear and detailed understanding of the impact
Evidence
● Before a charge is brought by the CPS, the case must pass the evidential test to demonstrate there is a
realistic prospect of a successful prosecution
● In England and Wales, the prosecution must provide evidence to prove the claim they are making, this is
known as the burden of proof- the proof must be beyond reasonable doubt or until the jury/magistrates
are sure of the verdict.
● Jurors are more swayed by a confession made by the defendant, even if there is evidence suggesting it
was coerced or when a judge instructs the jury to discount it
● Jurors also tend to place high currency on testimonial evidence, especially eyewitness testimonies, to
be an accurate account of events
○ Testimonial evidence can help to understand the sequence of events, and can also give
supplements and strengths to other evidence available
○ However testimonial evidence can be biassed, corrupt or influenced by other factors resulting in
miscarriages of justice
■ Case study: Ronald Cotton was convicted of raping a woman because she claimed it
was definitely him and spotted him in a line up and some more tests. Although Cotton
did not commit the crime, the jury convicted him due to the high confidence of the
woman who falsely accused him. Her recollection may have been impaired due to the
time of day or the fact that people tend to differentiate people of the same race as them
better than other races. This highlights how evidence can negatively affect the outcome
of a case because the victim’s flawed testimony meant Cotton experienced a
miscarriage of justice as he served 10 years for another's crime.
● Jurors also place a high degree of trust in forensics and DNA evidence as they perceive it as scientific
and infallible
○ Physical evidence provides a tangible object for the jury to see which cannot be distorted by the
defendant, experts can test the evidence and then give their opinion for/against a prosecution in
court
○ However, experts may disagree in court leading the jury being confused or swayed in a
particular direction
■ This may affect the outcome of a trial as it can delay the process, or the jury may be
convinced by one side of the court although they could be incorrect in their opinion.
○ Additionally, evidence can be flawed and subject to contamination
■ Case study: Adam Scott was falsely accused of raping a woman because a technician
failed to discard the petri dish that already had Scott's DNA on when testing for the
woman's attacker. Because the evidence was scientific, the jury was compelled to
believe Scott was the attacker although he had an alibi, phone records showed he was
far from the area and the physical evidence was the only evidence implying he was the
culprit. This shows how evidence can negatively affect the outcome of a case as it can
lead to unsafe trials and wrongful convictions since Scott was charged for the crime.
