Courts I

Question 1

Criminal Investigation Act

Answer 1

• Detain an arrested suspect for an initial period of six hours
• Should that time be exceeded investigators must seek authority from a Senior Officer to detain the person longer (valid reasons must accompany this extension, where the suspect can be held for a further six hours)
• Should that time be exceeded, investigators must seek further approval from a Magistrate who can approve a further eight hours of detention

Question 2

An arrested suspect (s.138) is a person who is under arrest under s.128 or on suspicion of committing an offence, and must be given the following rights:

Answer 2

• Informed of the offence for which they have been arrested
• Be cautioned prior to the interview
• Be provided with an opportunity to communicate with a legal practitioner
• If the person cannot speak English ‘sufficiently’ they must be provided with an interpreter

Question 3

Valid reasons to hold someone include (s.139):

Answer 3

• Searching places and vehicles connected to the suspect
• Searching the person for security purposes (anything that could endanger them or others)
• Investigating any offence the person is suspected of committing
• Interviewing the suspect in relation to any offence they are suspected of committing
• Deciding whether or not to charge the person with an offence

Question 4

Due process

Answer 4

• due process of law provides a formal means to ‘guarantee’ the impartiality and neutrality of trials
• The Australian Constitution contains no express guarantee of due process.

Question 5

Key elements to due process of law are:

Answer 5

Notice must be given, Publicity, Standards of proof.

Question 6

Notice must be given

Answer 6

Must be informed of charges and given adequate time to prepare their defence

Question 7

Publicity

Answer 7

• Trials are normally conducted in open court because they are considered ‘public matters’.
  
  • Avoids concerns regarding ‘justice’ behind closed doors.
  • Exceptions include trials affected by public disruption as well as trials involving afraid and/or embarrassed witnesses (e.g., victims of sexual assault, child abuse)

Question 8

Standards of proof.

Answer 8

The onus of proof lies with the prosecution who need to prove beyond reasonable doubt

Question 9

Evidence and rules guiding evidence.

Answer 9

• Extensive rules are in place regarding what is, and what is not allowable as legal evidence.
• e.g., Confessions to the police must be voluntary and persons must be warned beforehand of their rights.
• Each party is given the opportunity to tender evidence before the judge (and jury), and to cross-examine the other side so as to raise objections and/or clarify matters.

Question 10

Impartiality

Answer 10

• People are not allowed to be judges for their own cause.
• g., A judge cannot preside over a trial involving a friend or family member.
• Lawyers are able to challenge the inclusion of potential jury members in order to shape the composition of the jury. Ideally, this process results in an acceptable level of impartiality.

Question 11

Avenues for appeal.

Answer 11

• Disputes over convictions and/or
  sentences may be reviewed by the higher courts.
• Provides the accused with a
  further chance to either clear themselves of the charges or to argue for a more lenient sentence on the basis of
  mitigating circumstances.

Question 12

Evidence that is presented might be :

Answer 12

• The oral testimony of witnesses.
• Documentary evidence.
• Physical evidence.

Question 13

levels of courts

Answer 13

• The lowest level of court is the Magistrates Court.
• The next level of court in Australia is the District Court.
• The Supreme Court is the next level of Court in Australia.
• Above the Supreme court is the High Court which hears federal matters in regards to criminal issues.

Question 14

Trial by jury

Answer 14

• In a criminal trial, the jury determines issues of fact.
• The judge determines matters of law.
• The use of juries to determine issues of fact has captured the attention of the public, authorities, and most of all researchers.
• No other area has sparked such intense debate with both public and professional cries of injustice.

Question 15

Role of the jury

Answer 15

• To weigh the evidence presented in court and apply the law as directed by the judge to the ‘facts’ of the case
• To deliver a verdict as to whether the accused is guilty or not guilty of the crime
• Jurors are not required to justify the verdict

Question 16

Underlying assumptions of jury ability

Answer 16

• Provide undivided attention for the duration of the trial
• Discard information not formally admitted into evidence
• Carefully evaluate a mass of information
• Arrive at an unbiased verdict

Question 17

Selection and composition of jury

Answer 17

• Jury trials represent less than 1% of all criminal proceedings because many offences are finalised by a guilty plea prior to trial.
• Also- the majority of offences are heard within the Magistrate Court
• The overwhelming majority of jury trials relate to criminal offences
• Section 18 of the Juries Act (1957) – indicates a jury hearing a criminal trial must consist of 12 persons (with 6 reserve jurors).
• A jury pool is randomly selected from the electoral role.
• The jury pool attends court where their names are placed in a ballot box.
• 18 names are randomly selected.

Question 18

Juries Legislation Amendment Act 2011

Answer 18

• was passed to diversify the range of eligible jurors.
• Therefore, it limited the range of exclusions by right.
• Categories of people who were previously ineligible or excused now need to demonstrate that jury service will lead to “undue hardship, serious inconvenience to the person, the person’s family or the general public”.

Question 19

Section 103 Criminal Procedure Act

Answer 19

the prescribed officer must inform the accused can challenge any jurors, but cant object to the whole panel of jurors.

Question 20

Section 104 Criminal Procedure Act

Answer 20

the prosecutor can challenge peremptorily (for no reason), 3 jurors if there is one accused, or if more than one accused, there times the number of accused.

Question 21

Judges

Answer 21

• Can often see the long-term implications of the judgement of a case
• More difficult to confuse or distract a judge
• Costs much less
• Judges do not misunderstand the legal terminology

Question 22

Juries

Answer 22

• Group deliberation process protects against inaccurate recollections
• Inclusion of community standards and morals
• Judges are more likely to be influenced by political implications
• Judges may not be more capable of rendering rational decisions
• Judges may also be overwhelmed by complex cases

Question 23

Decision rules

Answer 23

Juries in Western Australia require a unanimous verdict or a majority of 10 to 2.

Question 24

Western Australia (Section 114 Criminal Procedure Act 2004).

Answer 24

• Majority verdicts (10 or more jurors) are permitted, except in relation to a charge of willful murder or murder, after the jury has deliberated for at least three hours.
• There is variation in the level of agreement required across jurisdictions.
• For example, three verdict decisions are required in Scotland.
  
  • Guilty, not proven and not guilty.

Question 25

Hastie et al. (1983)- Examined differences in unanimous versus majority juries.

Answer 25

• Unanimous juries are more likely to hang
• Unanimous juries take longer to examine the evidence
• Juror satisfaction is higher in unanimous juries
• Jurors with minority views are more likely to be heard in unanimous juries
• Despite these differences, verdicts do not differ significantly between min and majority juries.

Question 26

Shadow jury studies

Answer 26

• Collection of data concerning jury decision making through the use of ‘jurors’ who sit in on real trials but do not provide legally binding verdict decisions
• Ecological validity: Yes. At least, more ecological validity than mock jury studies.
• Internal validity: No. It is not possible to manipulate or control variables, or to infer causality.

Question 27

Post-deliberation studies

Answer 27

• Collection of data from real jurors about their decision making and verdict decisions during real trials.
• Internal validity: No. It is not possible to manipulate or control variables, or to infer causality.
• It is illegal to interview jurors in many countries.

Question 28

Case studies

Answer 28

Ecological validity Y Internal validity N

Question 29

Mock jury studies

Answer 29

Ecological validity Y Internal validity N

Question 30

Shadow jury studies

Answer 30

Ecological validity N Internal validity Y

Question 31

Post-deliberation studies

Answer 31

Post-deliberation studies

Question 32

burden of proof

Answer 32

on the prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt

Question 33

inquisitorial system

Answer 33

when the court itself is actively involved in the investigation - not used in australia