Ac 2.4 Criminology Personal Notes
Unit: Crime Scene to Courtroom Date: Name:
Topic: 2.4 Influences
- Evidence
- Media
- Witnesses
- Experts
- Politics
- Judiciary
- Barristers and legal teams
Notes made during the lesson (in your own words)
There are multiple key influences that might affect the outcome of criminal cases.
EVIDENCE
One of these factors is evidence, in order to reach a verdict the magistrates or jury has to
take into account all the testimonial and physical evidence that was presented in court.
Before any case is able to go to court police must provide sufficient evidence to persuade
the Crown Prosecution Service that there is a chance of successful prosecution and that
there is a case for the defendant to respond to.
If the case goes to court, the prosecution's role is to present arguments and evidence
against the defendant in order to secure a successful prosecution. As well as this, the
defence will challenge the prosecution's arguments by cross-examining witnesses and
providing any evidence of their own. The defendant will be acquitted if the prosecution fails
to convince the magistrates or jury that the individual accused is guilty ‘beyond reasonable
doubt’. For example, the case of Wayne Williams who was accused of playing a part in the
murder of 29 children between 1979 and 1981. Police officers involved in the case used
forensic evidence to support their suspicions; fibres from Williams' house, dog and vehicle
were found on the victim's clothing. This resulted in him being convicted of multiple
murders in 1982, therefore showing the impact that evidence can have on the outcome of
criminal cases.
WITNESSES
Both the defence and prosecution have the right to use witnesses to give testimonial
evidence in support of their argument. Examination-in-chief is when the party who called
upon the witness questions them during the trial. Typically witnesses will provide their
testimony to the court in person. However if both parties agree with the witness's evidence
it can be presented as a written statement or if the witness is intimidated/vulnerable they
may be permitted to give their evidence via a live video link or a recorded video. Magistrates
and jurors get to decide how much they agree with evidence that a witness provides, this
means that the quality of their testimony has the ability to determine the outcome of the
case.
, However, some jurors may hold gender stereotypes or racial prejudices which can influence
how inclined they are to believe evidence given by a witness. Research carried out by
Kaufmann et al discovered that jurors decided on witnesses credibility through the
emotions that the victim showed while giving their testimony, rather than the content of
what they were saying. As well as this, Brodsky et al also found that jurors' view on the
witness's evidence was highly dependent upon their confidence, likeability and
trustworthiness. Therefore highlighting how the witnesses physical traits like age, gender,
ethnicity, demeanour, class and others can change the outcome of a criminal case.
Eye-witness testimony can sometimes be inaccurate, even though majority of the time
jurors are willing to believe the evidence that they provide. The Innocence Project
determined that in over 70% of 352 wrongful convictions, the main form of evidence against
the suspect was eye-witness testimony, which was later overturned by forensic evidence.
For example the case of Pete Williams who was wrongfully imprisoned for rape in 1985. This
was due to an inaccurate eye-witness identification which resulted in Williams spending 21
years in prison until he was exonerated in 2007. Therefore proving the importance of
witnesses in the outcome of criminal cases.
EXPERTS
Expert witnesses are individuals with specialist knowledge that the general public does not
have, for example forensic scientists. Unlike normal witnesses, experts have the ability to
give their opinion to the court on specific cases due to their expertise and training. The
testimony that expert witnesses provide can be highly influential when determining the
outcome of a case, especially in complex cases that rely on highly technical evidence.
One disadvantage of experts is that jurors may automatically decide that their testimony is
accurate, or misunderstand what they are trying to convey. This is because some expert
witnesses are better at communicating their opinions with lay people than others. As well as
this there is no way for the jury to test the accuracy of experts testimony which can result in
miscarriages of justice. An example of this is the case of Sally Clarke, who was wrongfully
convicted of murdering her sons in 1996. This was due to the false testimony of expert
witness Sir Roy Meadows who stated to the jury that the children's deaths being accidental
was a “one in 73 million chance”, which was later found to be grossly inaccurate.
BARRISTERS AND LEGAL TEAMS
Solicitors and barristers are both qualified lawyers, however barristers work in higher level
courts where their role is to act as advocates and speak on behalf of their clients. During the
court case barristers will typically wear a gown and wig and can be used by both the
defence and prosecution. Solicitors typically work outside the court unlike barristers, unless
they are representing a client in lower courts. Solicitors will often brief barristers on cases
and gather evidence for them to use to support their argument. The outcome of criminal
cases can be affected by the quality of the barristers involved. This is because trials have two
adversaries (prosecution and defence) both of which are trying to convince the jury to side
with them. Therefore, the more persuasive, eloquent or charismatic barrister might be able
to persuade the jury and change the result of the case.
Barristers can be a very expensive part of criminal cases, this is because they are highly paid
with the most experienced barristers earning thousands every day. Consequently,
individuals with more money may be able to afford better representation giving them a
greater chance of the verdict being swayed in their favour.
Unit: Crime Scene to Courtroom Date: Name:
Topic: 2.4 Influences
- Evidence
- Media
- Witnesses
- Experts
- Politics
- Judiciary
- Barristers and legal teams
Notes made during the lesson (in your own words)
There are multiple key influences that might affect the outcome of criminal cases.
EVIDENCE
One of these factors is evidence, in order to reach a verdict the magistrates or jury has to
take into account all the testimonial and physical evidence that was presented in court.
Before any case is able to go to court police must provide sufficient evidence to persuade
the Crown Prosecution Service that there is a chance of successful prosecution and that
there is a case for the defendant to respond to.
If the case goes to court, the prosecution's role is to present arguments and evidence
against the defendant in order to secure a successful prosecution. As well as this, the
defence will challenge the prosecution's arguments by cross-examining witnesses and
providing any evidence of their own. The defendant will be acquitted if the prosecution fails
to convince the magistrates or jury that the individual accused is guilty ‘beyond reasonable
doubt’. For example, the case of Wayne Williams who was accused of playing a part in the
murder of 29 children between 1979 and 1981. Police officers involved in the case used
forensic evidence to support their suspicions; fibres from Williams' house, dog and vehicle
were found on the victim's clothing. This resulted in him being convicted of multiple
murders in 1982, therefore showing the impact that evidence can have on the outcome of
criminal cases.
WITNESSES
Both the defence and prosecution have the right to use witnesses to give testimonial
evidence in support of their argument. Examination-in-chief is when the party who called
upon the witness questions them during the trial. Typically witnesses will provide their
testimony to the court in person. However if both parties agree with the witness's evidence
it can be presented as a written statement or if the witness is intimidated/vulnerable they
may be permitted to give their evidence via a live video link or a recorded video. Magistrates
and jurors get to decide how much they agree with evidence that a witness provides, this
means that the quality of their testimony has the ability to determine the outcome of the
case.
, However, some jurors may hold gender stereotypes or racial prejudices which can influence
how inclined they are to believe evidence given by a witness. Research carried out by
Kaufmann et al discovered that jurors decided on witnesses credibility through the
emotions that the victim showed while giving their testimony, rather than the content of
what they were saying. As well as this, Brodsky et al also found that jurors' view on the
witness's evidence was highly dependent upon their confidence, likeability and
trustworthiness. Therefore highlighting how the witnesses physical traits like age, gender,
ethnicity, demeanour, class and others can change the outcome of a criminal case.
Eye-witness testimony can sometimes be inaccurate, even though majority of the time
jurors are willing to believe the evidence that they provide. The Innocence Project
determined that in over 70% of 352 wrongful convictions, the main form of evidence against
the suspect was eye-witness testimony, which was later overturned by forensic evidence.
For example the case of Pete Williams who was wrongfully imprisoned for rape in 1985. This
was due to an inaccurate eye-witness identification which resulted in Williams spending 21
years in prison until he was exonerated in 2007. Therefore proving the importance of
witnesses in the outcome of criminal cases.
EXPERTS
Expert witnesses are individuals with specialist knowledge that the general public does not
have, for example forensic scientists. Unlike normal witnesses, experts have the ability to
give their opinion to the court on specific cases due to their expertise and training. The
testimony that expert witnesses provide can be highly influential when determining the
outcome of a case, especially in complex cases that rely on highly technical evidence.
One disadvantage of experts is that jurors may automatically decide that their testimony is
accurate, or misunderstand what they are trying to convey. This is because some expert
witnesses are better at communicating their opinions with lay people than others. As well as
this there is no way for the jury to test the accuracy of experts testimony which can result in
miscarriages of justice. An example of this is the case of Sally Clarke, who was wrongfully
convicted of murdering her sons in 1996. This was due to the false testimony of expert
witness Sir Roy Meadows who stated to the jury that the children's deaths being accidental
was a “one in 73 million chance”, which was later found to be grossly inaccurate.
BARRISTERS AND LEGAL TEAMS
Solicitors and barristers are both qualified lawyers, however barristers work in higher level
courts where their role is to act as advocates and speak on behalf of their clients. During the
court case barristers will typically wear a gown and wig and can be used by both the
defence and prosecution. Solicitors typically work outside the court unlike barristers, unless
they are representing a client in lower courts. Solicitors will often brief barristers on cases
and gather evidence for them to use to support their argument. The outcome of criminal
cases can be affected by the quality of the barristers involved. This is because trials have two
adversaries (prosecution and defence) both of which are trying to convince the jury to side
with them. Therefore, the more persuasive, eloquent or charismatic barrister might be able
to persuade the jury and change the result of the case.
Barristers can be a very expensive part of criminal cases, this is because they are highly paid
with the most experienced barristers earning thousands every day. Consequently,
individuals with more money may be able to afford better representation giving them a
greater chance of the verdict being swayed in their favour.
