Search

This paper presents an analysis of 88 criminal convictions that have since been quashed on the basis of error of fact (wrongful convictions) that have occurred in England and Wales since 2007, in the context of wider set of 389 wrongful convictions that have occurred in England and Wales since 1970. Based on this analysis, three key contributors of concern are identified as having been influential in leading to wrongful convictions recently - digital evidence, guilty pleas, and misleading testimony. Cases involving each of these factors are discussed, including cases from the Post Office Scandal, which make up many of the identified wrongful convictions during this period. In considering each factor, failings in the criminal justice system that leave defendants vulnerable to wrongful conviction are discussed. The paper concludes with brief initial suggestions for reform to provide greater protection against highlighted vulnerabilities.

Based on recent discussions regarding legal epistemology, this paper intends to investigate and propose standards of proof for the decision that decrees preventive detention of the accused in the Brazilian criminal procedure. With this objective, the first part will answer the following questions: why use standards of proof and how to formulate a standard of proof. Next, it will analyze the relationship between procedural technique of cognition and standards of proof and will explain the factual-legal structure of the judicial decision on personal precautionary measures. Finally, based on these theoretical contributions, alongside the analysis of concepts used by the legislator and the interpretation given by legal scholarship to legal provisions, the study will propose standards of proof for both fumus comissi delicti and periculum liberatis. The methodology used throughout the study will be the analysis of bibliography on legal epistemology and criminal procedural law., A partir das recentes discussões no âmbito da epistemologia jurídica, o presente trabalho pretende investigar e propor standards de prova para a decisão que decreta a prisão preventiva do imputado no processo penal brasileiro. Com este objetivo, na primeira parte responderá aos seguintes questionamentos: por que utilizar standards de prova e como formular um standard de prova. A seguir, analisará a relação entre a técnica processual de cognição e os standards probatórios e explicitará a estrutura fático-legal da decisão judicial sobre medidas cautelares pessoais. Finalmente, a partir destes aportes teóricos, somados à análise dos conceitos utilizados pelo legislador e da interpretação dada pela processualística penal brasileira aos dispositivos legais, o estudo proporá standards de prova tanto para o fumus comissi delicti quanto para o periculum libertatis. A metodologia utilizada ao longo do trabalho será a revisão bibliográfica de estudos sobre epistemologia jurídica e direito processual penal.

Confession is a traditional and common evidence in Criminal cases. It is assumed that the reasonable person, does not plead guilty. However, some of the defendants confessed to the crime in which they actually did not commit and are innocent. In this paper, by using case study method, the 13 cases which a false confession obtained by police, were analyzed. The data were collected by case analysis, observation and interviews. Police place in the forefront of obtaining a false confession. When the police believe a person is a criminal and hasn’t got any evidence, suspect’s confession is the easiest solution to prove accusation and to finish investigation. Police officers obtain a false confession by a three-step process: suspected misclassification, coercion and contamination. Recording interrogations along with training correct ways of interrogation and informing police officers as to false confessions causes and consequences will prevent or reduce false confessions in police investigation.

El presente trabajo analiza uno de los instrumentos más novedosos en materia probatoria, como es la orden europea de investigación. Este instrumento posibilita la obtención y aseguramiento de un elemento probatorio en un Estado distinto al que emite la orden, que supone un avance respecto al antiguo exhorto europeo de obtención de pruebas, que exigía que la prueba estuviera disponible en el Estado de emisión. Nos centraremos en la fase de reconocimiento y ejecución, por la importancia que tiene en el procedimiento de cooperación. Concretamente, trataremos las causas de sustitución y suspensión de la ejecución. This paper analyses one of the newest instruments in the matters of evidence, the European Investigation Order. This instrument makes it possible to obtain and preservation evidence in a other State than the State issuing the warrant, which is an improvement on the old European Evidence Warrant, which required the evidence to be available in the issuing State. We will focus on the recognition and execution, because of its importance in the cooperation procedure. Specifically, we will deal with the causes of replacement and suspension of execution. Fundación Manuel Serra Domínguez

Until recently Scots law had not explicitly developed a test on the reliability of expert evidence as a precondition for its admissibility. The court of appeal in HM Advocate v. Young (2014), building upon earlier decisions in Liehne (2011) and Hainey (2013), has now set out criteria for determining whether expert evidence is based on a science or other organised discipline in order for the evidence to be admissible. This paper considers the approach of Scots law before and after Young and provides a critical examination of the court's approach in that case. It argues that the judgment fails to deal with many relevant issues, such as those canvassed in the US Supreme Court in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc (1983) and by the Law Commission for England and Wales in its recent report on expert evidence.

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. This article reviews the approaches taken by the courts to the admissibility of voice identification evidence in four jurisdictions; England and Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland. Each jurisdiction addresses the question in a different way and each approach is open to criticism. This paper will argue that a contextualised approach to the problem would allow for improvements which would enhance the quality of the evidence and the adjudicative process.

The purpose of this paper is to encourage a reflection on the use of anonymous witness evidence by the European Court of Human Rights. An analysis of the leading cases solved by the Strasbourg judges will provide an overview of the European case law developments on such a delicate topic, considering how the accused’s right of defence is seriously impaired when anonymous depositions are admitted in proceedings. The Court’s most recent decisions on this topic do create some concern. They represent a considerable step backward in the guaranteed right to confrontation, which, especially when dealing with anonymity, does not seem acceptable. While there is no question on the need to protect persons other than the accused in criminal proceedings and on the urgency to safeguard the safety of witnesses, when in danger, and preserve the source of evidence, on the other hand, it is hard to imagine what “counterbalancing procedures” could compensate for all that the accused is denied when the identity of the person making incriminating statements against him/her is concealed. It is, therefore, a matter of making a civilised choice, and of asking ourselves whether in a trial that still aspires to be defined as “fair”, anonymous incriminations may be tolerated., Il presente lavoro propone una riflessione sull’utilizzo della testimonianza anonima da parte della Corte europea dei diritti dell’uomo. L’analisi dei principali leading cases,risolti dai giudici di Strasburgo, permetterà di cogliere l’evoluzione della giurisprudenza europea su un tema così delicato a causa della grave menomazione che subisce il diritto di difesa dell’accusato quando sono impiegate all’interno del processo le testimonianze anonime. Le ultime sentenze intervenute su questo specifico tema preoccupano perché confermano il progressivo arretramento da parte della Corte europea sulla fondamentale garanzia del contraddittorio. Se, da un lato, si condivide la necessità di tutelare, all’interno del processo penale, diritti di soggetti diversi dall’imputato e si riconosce l’urgenza, a fronte di una situazione di pericolo per il testimone, di salvaguardarne l’incolumità e di preservare la fonte di prova, dall’altro, tuttavia, non si comprende, infatti, quale “counterbalancing procedures” possa restituire all’imputato ciò che gli viene tolto in termini di difesa non comunicandogli l’identità del testimone. Si tratta, allora, di compiere una scelta di civiltà domandandosi se in un processo che vuole continuare a definirsi «equo» l’accusa anonima possa essere tollerata., O presente trabalho propõe uma reflexão sobre a utilização da testemunha anônima por parte do Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos. A análise dos principais leading cases, resolvidos pelos juízes de Estrasburgo, permitirá compreender a evolução da jurisprudência europeia sobre essa temática delicada em razão de graves violações ao direito de defesa do acusado quando são empregadas no processo as testemunhas anônimas. As últimas sentenças pronunciadas sobre esse específico ponto preocupam porque confirmam o progressivo regresso por parte do Tribunal europeu em relação à fundamental garantia do contraditório. Se, por um lado, reconhece-se a necessidade de tutelar, dentro do processo penal, direitos de sujeitos além do imputado e percebe-se a urgência, diante de uma situação de perigo para a testemunha, de tutelar a sua incolumidade e de preservar a fonte de prova, por outro, todavia, não se compreende quais “counterbalancing procedures” podem devolver ao imputado aquilo que lhe é tirado em termos de defesa ao não lhe revelar a identidade da testemunha. Trata-se, então, de realizar uma escolha de civilidade questionando-se se em um processo que queira continuar a sse definir “equitativo” a acusação anônima pode ser tolerada.

The file attached to this record is the author's final peer reviewed version. This paper reviews the current law in respect of whether juries may permitted to listen to recordings of a suspect's voice with a view to undertaking an identification. It discusses the factors which impact upon the accuracy of the process and suggests procedural amendments to reduce the risk of misidentification taking place.

Eyewitness identification is an important criminal evidence for the justice system, however, innocent people can be identified for crimes that they did not commit. Procedures adopted for recognition may increase the likelihood of false identification, such as the presentation of a single suspect (show-up), or multiple suspects at the same time (suspects album). In a context of patent irregularities, eyewitness identification through photographs are believed to be less reliable in Brazil, where the live identification is preferred. In this paper, from legal epistemology and psychology of testimony, we approach the advantages and possibilities of photo eyewitness identification as a method to enable a fair lineup procedure. Empirical data from experimental and cognitive psychology are presented that confirm the results of photographic method for eyewitness identification and, in the end, arguments are presented for the adoption towards the construction of a Brazilian democratic criminal code, which ensures effective reach to the presumption of innocence., O reconhecimento de pessoas é uma prova importante para o processo penal, entretanto, inocentes podem ser reconhecidos por crimes que não cometeram. Procedimentos adotados para o reconhecimento podem aumentar a probabilidade de um falso reconhecimento, como a apresentação de um único suspeito (show-up), ou múltiplos suspeitos ao mesmo tempo (álbum de suspeitos). Neste contexto de manifestas irregularidades, o reconhecimento por método fotográfico é tido como pouco confiável no Brasil, sendo preferível o reconhecimento presencial. Neste artigo, a partir do diálogo entre a epistemologia jurídica e da psicologia do testemunho, considerando pesquisas e experimentos, refletimos sobre as vantagens e possibilidades da realização de reconhecimento por método fotográfico como forma facilitar um procedimento de alinhamento justo. São apresentados dados empíricos da psicologia experimental que confirmam resultados do método fotográfico para reconhecimento e, ao final, com base neles, são apresentados argumentos para a sua adoção rumo à construção de um processo penal brasileiro de contornos democráticos, que assegure alcance efetivo à presunção de inocência.