Causing Grievous Bodily Harm Against Ex-Girlfriend - Case Study Example

Law of Evidence Table of Contents Introduction 3 Overview of the Case 3 Discussion 4 Conclusion 9 References 10 Introduction Law and justice are the most important parts of a constituency and are termed as integral when operating a society or a secular system of government. The different resources of law and justice are often noted to have strong influence on the overall activities of society1. In the provided case there were certain issues related with the improper availability of evidences that would act as effective support to justify the different situations. It is evident from the review of the case that there were no eyewitnesses, who has actually seen Dale committing the crime and justify his position as a convict. Furthermore, this lack of proper evidences puts the case in a tumultuous situation making the jurisdiction even more complex. With due significance to this notion, the essay elaborates evidential issues that were related to the case of Dale, who was charged on the grounds of causing Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) on his ex-girlfriend Valerie. Overview of the Case Dale was accused of causing GBH on his ex-girlfriend to a life-threatening extent. Depending on the fact that the locality where Valerie (Dale’s ex-girlfriend) resides is often deserted at that time of night, there were very only a negligible evidence, which substantiated the scenario except her neighbour who regularly takes his dog out for walk. Hence, it gets harder to prove Dale guilty. However, the suspect, Dale, pleaded to be innocent and said that he was not present in the scene or anywhere around Valerie’s neighbourhood. This, however, he could not justify with ample evidence and failed to support his position of innocence. Discussion The case stated has and evidential issue, which fails to provide a detailed understanding of the facts, that would provide support to the needs. Specifically, in situations of sexual harassments and litigations, the evidentiary issues are often prominent2. It is noteworthy in this context that the situations of GBH are more popular among the relationship holders or husband wives evidences for such instances are often absent3;4. This creates a huge misrepresentation of data and may lead to the deliverance of improper justice. Correspondingly, in the present case, evidentiary issues were quite prominent. Firstly, the neighbour who was asked for recognizing the suspect was not provided with the proper set of people to identify5. Dale was probably the only person who was matching as per the specifications of Walter (Valerie’s neighbour) provided during her interview6. This could be an added advantage for Dale to plead on the lack of proper management of the principles related with identification of criminals. Rather, the fact that out of the nine suspects who were presented in front of Walter only three were matching with the descriptions7. Furthermore, Walter even affirmed that he had only heard louder intonations coming from the directions of Valerie’s house but he could not exactly figure out the topic being discussed. This further weakens the case largely and affects the overall development of a strong case against Dale. Additionally, there were no strong evidence that could provide a detailed account of the circumstances that would act as a strong support for developing a proper case against Dale8;9. The overall verdict of a case is completely based on the strength of evidence gathered that would help justify the position of the verdict as well as the defendant10. This lack of proper evidence, except for one eyewitness, will surely weaken the position of the appellant (i.e. Valerie). It is Walter who had seen Dale leaving Valerie’s apartment, argues against his plea of innocence and acts as a sole recourse to put Dale into suspicion. It must also be noted that Walter, who is presented as the only evidence supporting Valeria’s charge on Dale, could not even recollect the exact discussion that was on progress on the eve of the crime being committed. Thus, there are even high chances that the charge of using abusive words for harassment will be nullified due to lack of strong evidence11. On the other hand, there are certain loopholes that are evident in the case that might act in support of the allegations charged against Dale. Notably, Walter witnesses that Dale has been near Valeria’s property at the time of the night. This could be justified as the neighbour witnesses that the suspect was leaving the premises just after the occurrence of the event12. Although this does not directly justify that Dale has actually mentally and physically harassed Valeria but it also does not put him out of the list of suspects. At a similar situation, Dale’s refusal to be present in the neighbourhood could not be justified, as he fails to provide positive alibis that would support his presence at the gym13;14. Furthermore, the strength of the case against Dale is summed up as another ex-girlfriend affirms his arrogant nature and comments on facing a situation of both mental as well as physical abuses15;16. The lack of evidences that would support Dale’s justification for not being at a place near the house of Valeria puts Dale into a position of victimization17. The evidences of Dale’s ex-girlfriend is even going to act as a positive evidence that supports the development of a proper justification to the action that could have possibly been committed by him at certain point of time. This could be used as a positive source of evidence against Dale as it proves victim’s propensity towards committing crimes18. Hence, it may be considered as a source of evidence that the suspect has previously tried to commit similar offences19. Use of the code of conduct that is practiced by the criminals during a certain point of time can act under these circumstances as a positive move for developing strong evidence that would support his position20. Hence, the evidence that the prosecutor presented based on Mary’s statement of facing similar instances as that of Valeria can be used to develop a better case against Dale. Furthermore, depending on the evidences that Dale failed to furnish in support of his exact movements and location at the time of crime weakens Dale’s position and can help to suspect him21. Thus, it can be stated that even though the evidence obtained is not very apparent either on the suspect’s side or on the side of the defendant, both the parties should be trying to develop their evidence bases to strengthen their allegations and counter-arguments22. This would act as an added advantage for the development of the case and support the case towards a proper direction. Furthermore, evidence those were available against Dale, based on his previous conduct as well as on the witness of Walter that he has seen Dale leaving Valeria’s property, justify the fact that he might have committed the possible criminal offense23. However, if the suspect is able to provide with adequate evidences to support his confirmation of being absent from the crime scene could turn the case. Nevertheless, the sole fact that there is lack of proper evidences on both ends makes the case bit tumultuous24;25. Furthermore, based on the series of events that has occurred and the evidence available based on the prosecutor’s approach towards putting up witnesses is even going to act as a negative approach for developing the case against Dale26. Additionally, depending on the system of jurisdiction that is evident under the UK system of governance the significance of strong proof becomes non-negligible. Hence, the burden of evidences would be a determining factor for supporting the jurisdiction and would even act as a strong tool to sustain the occurrence of events27;28. Notably, based on the strong evidences and depending on the flow of events it can be ascertained that the burden of evidence is falling against Dale and there are huge chances that he will be suspected against the allegation of Valeria29. Conversely, due to lack of proper eyewitnesses, chances are high that the suspect gets a relief if he can put up a strong record of his movements during the occurrence of crime30;31. Conclusion From the above analysis of the case, there are certain apparent issues leading to the complexities of the given case suspecting Dale for sexual harassment charges brought by Valerie. The evidence collected for a particular event or crime acts as a positive source for developing justifications and acts as a support for proof. In accordance to the law, evidence available in support of the suspect or against him can be considered as a valuable support to justify the positions of both the ends and even develop a proper theory of crime. Furthermore, the rising issues of GBH have been increasing consciousness of the government to develop jurisdiction to prevent such crimes. However, the situation that has been provided in the particular case reflects that there a major gap exists in terms of evidence at both ends. This situation is creating a huge amount of confusion and is creating complicacies for providing proper jurisdiction under the referred case. Correspondingly, according to the Law of Evidence, the jurisdiction will be provided in favour of the party who is capable in putting up strong base of evidence. References Books Anderson Terence, Schum David and Twining William, Analysis of Evidence. (Cambridge University Press, 2005). Choo Andrew, Evidence. (Oxford University Press, 2012). Crown, Expert Evidence in Criminal Proceedings in England and Wales. (TSO, 2011). Crighton David A. and Towl Graham J., Forensic Psychology. (John Wiley & Sons, 2015). Gibson Bryan, the Pocket A-Z of Criminal Justice. (Waterside Press, 2009). Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Justice Committee, Joint Enterprise: Eleventh Report of Session 2010-12, Vol. 1: Report, Together with Formal Minutes, Oral and Written Evidence, Volume 1. (The Stationery Office, 2012). Keane Adrian and McKeown Paul, The Modern Law of Evidence. (Oxford University Press, 2014). Kramer Matthew, Grant Claire, Colburn Ben and Hatzistavrou Antony, The Legacy of H.L.A. Hart: Legal, Political and Moral Philosophy. (Oxford University Press, 2008). McFarquhar Helena, Key Concepts in Criminology and Criminal Justice. (Palgrave Macmillan, 2011). Ormerod David, Smith John Cyril and Hogan Brian, Smith and Hogans Criminal Law. (Oxford University Press, 2011). Partington Martin, Introduction to the English Legal System 2013-2014. (Oxford University Press, 2013). Tapper Colin, Cross & Tapper on Evidence. (Oxford University Press, 2010). Journals Crown, “Assault Definitive Guideline” Sentencing Council, (2011): 1-30. Duranton Gilles and Turner Matthew A., the Fundamental Law of Road Congestion: Evidence from US Cities. NBER Working Paper Series, (2009): 1-45. Krieger Linda J. and Fox Cindi, “Evidentiary Issues in Sexual Harassment Litigation.” Berkeley Journal of Gender, Law & Justice, (2013): 1.1, 1-26. Online Sources Crown, ‘Guidance on Sentencing in the Court Martial (Justice, 2013). accessed 22 February 2015 Crown, ‘Domestic Violence & Child Abuse Offences (Justice, 2013). accessed 22 February 2015. Crown, Understanding the progression of serious cases through the Criminal Justice System. (GOV, 2012). accessed 22 February 2015 CPS, ‘CPS Guidance on: Joint Enterprise Charging Decisions. (CPS, 2014) accessed 22 February 2015. CPS, Offences against the Person, Incorporating the Charging Standard (CPS, 2015) accessed 22 February 2015. Cases Fagan v MPC [1969] 1 QB 439 R v Burstow [1997] 3 WLR 534 R v Hopley [1860] 2 F&F 202 R v Ireland [1997] 3 WLR 534 R v Nickolson [1998] S v Borotho [2012] ZAFSHC 243 Read More