criminal evidence Flashcards
what role does the jury plan in a trial?
finders of facts, determine the truth based on the evidence presented
what does the phrase ‘child of the jury system imply’?
the jury system is fundamental to the legal process, relying on the collective judgement of jurors
what is epistemology in the context of evidence?
the study of knowledge, focusing on good ways of knowing/understanding what constitutes valid evidence
what is the difference between prejudicial and probative evidence?
prejudicial evidence may unfairly sway the jury against the party whilst probative evidence is relevant and helpful in proving a fact in the case
why is relevance important in evidence?
must be relevant to admissible - directly relate to the facts being determined by the jury
what does PACE s76 allow regarding evidence?
provides general ability to exclude unfair evidence, extending the common law power to ensure fairness in trials
what types of evidence are excluded from trials?
privileged information, confidential and opinions, except for expert opinions that are based on specialised knowledge
What are the special admissibility rules regarding evidence?
apply to hearsay, generally not admissible unless it meets exceptions, and confessions, which must adhere to specific legal standards
What are special jury directions related to evidence?
guidance on good character evidence, which can highlight a defendant’s positive traits, and identification evidence, which requires careful scrutiny for reliability.
What is typically the basis for appealing evidence cases?
appeal based on whether the conviction is considered “unsafe.”
What does it mean for a conviction to be “unsafe”?
if there are doubts about the reliability or validity of the evidence that led to the conviction
What is the core issue in evaluating evidence?
core issue is epistemological, focusing on whether the information presented is “safe” and reliable for determining guilt or innocence
What is the difference between probative and prejudicial evidence?
Probative evidence is valuable for proving a point in court, while prejudicial evidence may unfairly sway the jury against a defendant, leading to bias
What does the phrase “child of the jury system” refer to?
that the assessment of evidence and its impact is inherently tied to the jury system, which relies on jurors to evaluate the evidence presented
R v Loosely; Attorney generals reference (No 3 of 2000) [2002] 1 Cr. App. R. 29
entrapment not a defence - 2 cases were heard together:
name given as a source for drugs in pub, sold cocaine twice
sold cigarettes to defendant, then asked if he could get them heroine, said he ‘was not into that’ eventually they got him to provide some
What case involved the issue of entrapment with the exchange of cheap goods for cocaine to an undercover cop?
Moore [2013] EWCA Crim 85.
Which article discusses recent developments in entrapment and covert policing, published in 2006?
Ormerod, Recent Developments in Entrapment [2006] Covert Policing Review 65.
What is one of the legitimate triggers for a police operation in cases of entrapment, according to Ormerod’s article?
Reasonable suspicion of criminal activity as a legitimate trigger for the police operation
What is a control mechanism for testing the police’s good faith in an entrapment case?
Reasonable suspicion of criminal activity
What is required to ensure proper control of an undercover police operation, as outlined by Ormerod?
Authorisation and supervision of the operation
What concept addresses whether the means used in a police operation are justified for a particular type of offence?
Necessity and proportionality of the means employed to police particular types of offence
What do the terms “unexceptional opportunity” and causation refer to in the context of entrapment?
The concepts of ‘unexceptional opportunity’ and causation.
What must be authenticated in an entrapment case to ensure its admissibility as evidence?
Authentication of the evidence, such as the conversations and contacts
what is the case R v Turner [1975] about?
deals with provocation and murder
what did the quote fro the case R v Turner [1975] state regarding jurors and psychiatrists?
“Jurors do not need psychiatrists to tell them how ordinary folk who are not suffering from any mental illness are likely to react to the stresses and strains of life.”
What does the CPS guidance say about who can be considered an expert in court?
‘The court is concerned that evidence should not be given by experts who are, patently unqualified or little more than ‘enthusiastic amateurs.’
What was the significance of the case R v. Silverlock [1894]?
It involved an amateur graphologist, highlighting the issue of qualifications in expert testimony.
What does the case R v Hodges [2003] illustrate about expert witnesses?
It involves a police officer with years of experience, showing that practical experience can qualify someone as an expert.
What do the Criminal Procedure Rules state about factors determining the reliability of expert opinion?
Factors include the extent and quality of the data on which the expert’s opinion is based, and the validity of the methods by which they were obtained
What is one key consideration regarding inferences in expert opinions according to the Criminal Procedure Rules?
if the expert’s opinion relies on an inference from any findings, it must properly explain how safe or unsafe the inference is, whether by reference to statistical significance or in other appropriate terms
What does the Criminal Procedure Rules say about the reliability of results used in expert opinions?
If the expert’s opinion relies on the results of any method (such as a test, measurement, or survey), it must take proper account of matters affecting the accuracy or reliability of those results, including the degree of precision or margin of uncertainty
How does the review process affect the reliability of an expert’s opinion according to the Criminal Procedure Rules?
The extent to which any material upon which the expert’s opinion is based has been reviewed by others with relevant expertise and the views of those others on that material are important factors
What consideration is given to an expert’s opinion based on material outside their field of expertise?
The extent to which the expert’s opinion is based on material falling outside the expert’s own field of expertise is a factor in determining the reliability of that opinion
What does the Criminal Procedure Rules state regarding the completeness of information available to an expert?
information available is crucial, and it must be determined whether the expert took account of all relevant information in arriving at the opinion, including the context of any facts to which the opinion relates
How is the range of expert opinion relevant to determining the reliability of an expert’s opinion?
important to know where the expert’s own opinion lies within that range and whether the expert’s preference has been properly explained
What is said about the methods used by experts in the Criminal Procedure Rules?
rules state that the expert’s methods should follow established practice in the field, and if they do not, the reason for the divergence must be properly explained
What is the significance of the case R (on the application of Wright) v the Crown Prosecution Service [2015] EWHC 628 (Admin)?
case illustrates the application of the principles regarding expert evidence, highlighting the importance of clarity in methodology and the reliability of expert testimony in legal proceedings
What was the outcome of the case involving a civilian working for the police who identified magic mushrooms?
The magistrates found the civilian to be an expert in identifying magic mushrooms; however, the methodology was unclear, and no sources were cited to support the claim that mushrooms could be picked as late as October due to climate change
Why was the conviction deemed unsafe in the case involving the magic mushrooms expert
The conviction was considered unsafe due to the reliance on the “expert” testimony, which lacked a clear methodology and credible sources, undermining the reliability of the evidence presented
