Reliability of Evidence - Case Study Example

PART I Reliability of Evidence Lesley Mosleed, an 11-year-old schoolgirl from Rochdale, Manchester was murdered on the 5th October, 1975.Stefan Kiszko, a local tax clerk was wrongly accused following unreliable investigations that led him serve 16 years in prison. Many years later, new investigations were ordered and a 53 year- old-aged man found guilty of the murder after a DNA evidence connected him with a sample found at the crime scene. The above case presents one of the many cases that have put into question the reliability of evidences. With the major purpose of crime scene investigations being the recognition and collection of evidence, a number of forensic techniques are used. One such evidence gathering technique used is the DNA technique. According to Fisher & Fisher (2012,Pp.8 ),the DNA technique is a major example of actual science in operation, and the only technique within the forensic field that can consistently give results that one can count on with a significant confidence level. This technique is argued to be reliable and often seen as a gold standard in matters of forensic investigation. Another technique that has proved reliable in crime investigations is the documentation technique. According to Lee et.al (2001,Pp.66), the documentation technique, which involves the documentation or recording by notes, sketching, photography or video-taping, not only provides critical information for probable future reconstruction, courtroom presentation and case analysis but also supports the authentication/testimony of the investigator as regards what was observed, the crime location, the crime nature and the crime scene condition. The criminal justice system has often depended heavily on eyewitness and confession evidence to prove various facts surrounding a criminal event. Eyewitnesses and confession evidences, as revealed in the case study, are capable of identifying culprits, recalling conversations or even remembering other details relating to the crime scene. On the other hand, eye witness, though an integral element of the trial system, has been criticized for its undependability following a number of recorded incidents of wrongly-convicted individuals, a factor blamed on mishandling of the fragile memory of eyewitnesses. In fact, according to Garrett (2012, Pp.1), eyewitness misidentifications form the only greatest source of faulty evidence. Wells et.al (2006,Pp.46) highlights that this can be attributed to the fact that an individual’s brain is often not developed to operate as an instant replay camera or recorder, as such, the analytical reflection of psychological dimensions relating to eye witness identification has found out that the risks associated with the weak sensory perception and recollection, mostly, irresistible. On the same note, the reliability of confession evidence has been put to question. According to Hasel et.al (2009, Pp.122), for instance, a study, a surprisingly 60% of volunteers who had initially identified a crime suspect from a line-up flip-flopped when a different individual confessed. In fact, even the individuals who were initially very certain of their initial identification undergone a sudden drop in terms of their confidence. Conclusion From the case study, it is evident that the reliability of evidence is indeed an issue of debate, a factor that indeed calls for a measure of not only fairness but also accuracy within the criminal justice system. Work Cited Fisher, Barry & Fisher, David. Techniques of Crime Scene Investigation, Eighth Edition, CRC Press, 2012 Garret, Brandon. Getting it Wrong: Convicting the Innocent, Pp.1, 2011 Hasel et.al. On the Presumption of Evidentiary Independence: Can Confessions Corrupt Eyewitness Identifications? Psychological Science, 20 (1): Pp.122, 2009 Lee, Henry, Palmbach, Timothy & Miller, Marilyn. Henry Lees Crime Scene Handbook. Academic Press, 2001 Wells, Gary, Memon, Amina & Penrod, Steven. Eyewitness Evidence: Improving Its Probative Value, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 7, No. 2, Pp.45-75, 2006 PARTII Reliability of Evidence Christopher Craig and Bentley were involved in crime within a warehouse. When approached by the police, the two were involved in an altercation while trying to protect themselves, leading to the death of a police constable, Sidney Miles. Also, in the process of police trying to arrest them, Craig fractured left wrist and spine when he jumped from the roof. The two also denied some of the confessions they initially made to the police during their arrest process. Generally, this case faced a lot of ambiguities relating to the evidence and confessions made from the point of arrest to legal proceedings involving the two. Crime scene investigations entail both the crime scene target area and the surrounding area with the major purpose of the crime scene investigation being not only the recognition but the collection of the physical evidence as well. A range of evidence gathering techniques are used in this process. One of the techniques of evidence gathering and which is highlighted within the case study is the eyewitness identification. The identification of an accused as the wrongdoer is often an aspect of many crimes, whether the individual accused a major actor in the crime or an accomplice. Despite cries over its fallibility, eyewitness identification continues to play an important role in the investigation and prosecution of criminals (Klobuchar, et.al, 2006, Pp.383). Another technique of evidence gathering highlighted, though non-scientific, and which goes on playing a significant role in terms of the investigation and the prosecution of criminals is the confession technique. Confessions made to the investigators continue to have a considerable importance in as far as the criminal justice system processes are concerned (Benoit, 2010). Both parties acknowledge the continuous influence of words expressed by criminal defendants on juries as words often explain particular events, in addition to describing emotions, thoughts or motives, which would have otherwise stayed concealed and undiscovered from any forensic test. Despite their continued use in investigation and prosecution processes, eyewitness and confession evidence have received significant criticism. The eyewitness evidence has been questioned with regards to its unreliability. According to Schmechel et.al (2006,Pp.189), debates over its unreliability have been attributed to a number of modern researches on the eyewitness memory over the last three decades as well as the rising attention given to the issues in many cases involving wrongfully convicted people. On the other hand, confession evidences have been associated with incriminations, a factor that can lead to wrongful convictions, hence putting to question the reliability of confession evidence (Police Chief Magazine, 2009, Pp.1). Conclusion From the above analysis of the case study, it is clearly evident the reliability of evidence is a current significant issue within the criminal legal systems. The reliability of evidence as highlighted, has a significant impact on the conviction of suspects hence the need for both the crime scene investigation process to not only be thorough but to be to the standard as this also impacts on the legal process involving the suspect. Work Cited Benoit, C.Confessions and the Constitution: The Remedy for Violating Constitutional Safeguards, 2010, Pp.1 Klobuchar, A, Steblay, N & Caligiuri, H.“Improving Eyewitness Identifications: Hennepin County’s Blind Sequential Lineup Pilot Project.”Cardozo Public Law, Policy & Ethics Journal (4), Pp.381-413, 2006 Police Chief Magazine. False Confessions, 2009 Schmechel, R, OToole, T, Easterly, C & Loftus, E. Beyond the Ken? Testing Jurors Understanding of Eyewitness Reliability Evidence, Vol. 46, No. 2, Pp. 177-214 PART III A Critical Examination of the Workings of the Jury System Not only have Juries been used for more than 1,000 years but they are also argued to be used prior to the Norman Conquest. Generally; juries play a significant role of ensuring that the legal system is equitable. Previously they were used mainly as witnesses rather than as decision-makers, but currently their major duty is to make decisions based on facts stated in a given case and thereafter settle on a verdict (Morgulis, 2009, Pp.9).Overall, they have for a long-time formed part of the legal system and played a significant role in maintaining equity within the legal system. On the other hand, in the wake of increasing exonerations, their roles within the criminal justice system have been put to question. In fact, as highlighted by Morgulis (2009, Pp.9), the workings of the jurist system ranks amongst the most controversial issues in the modern debate regarding the merits of the legal system. According to Belloni & Hodgson (2000, PP.89), often, many individuals connect the jury with high expectations in as far as fair trials are concerned. On the other hand, this has not been the real situation. As such, a major criticism, and which is also highlighted in the two case studies is based on the fact that jury system lack the capability or the proficiency to comprehend all aspects relating to the provided evidence, especially those involving complex and longer trials. Morgulis (2009) argues that juries are often ill-equipped to deal with technical issues or evaluate specialist testimony, a fact that is highlighted by the wrongful convictions that have lately come to the forefront of public debates. A trial before a jury is often seen as the peak of the criminal justice system with the characteristic of the trial system frequently viewed as the very description of the due process (Tinsley,2001,Pp.2).This is, on the other hand, strange considering that a number of critics do not agree with this fact. In view of this, a significant criticism placed on the jury system is based on the system’s unpredictability as well as the vagaries of the juries. According to Tinsley (2001,Pp.5), majority of the juries appear to be interpreting the law the wrong way in order to match the verdict that they wish to attain, and thereafter persuade the minority to that particular view. Besides, Tinsley (2001, Pp.6) argues that there are extensive, irrational variations in terms of the findings of the legal responsibilities and the amount of damages among many similar cases involving the jurors. This implies that the jury system has failed to interpret evidence with various elements put in mind; a factor that Tinsley (2001, Pp.6) argues makes it an unreasonable/irrational system. On the hand, despite the criticisms regarding the workings of the jury system, there have been arguments that they have been let down especially when being informed about the facts relating to a case. As a result, this ought not to be used in assessing the workings of the jury system. Work Cited Belloni, Frank & Hodgson, Jacqueline. Criminal Injustice: An Evaluation of the Criminal Justice Process in Britain. London: Palgrave, Pp.89-93, 2000 Morgulis, Eugene. Juror Reactions to Scientific Testimony: Unique Challenges in Complex Mass Torts, Pp.1-28, 2009 Tinsley, Yvette. Juror Decision-Making: A Look inside the Jury Room, The British Criminology Conference: Selected Proceedings. Vol.4, Pp.6-11, 2001 Read More