Search

The system of adversarial trials and the principle of orality in the giving of testimony by witnesses does little to encourage the giving of evidence by the most robust witness yet in its unaltered form provides the basis upon which many of the decisions in the English courts have traditionally been made. There has been a growing recognition that the orthodox trial system must be reviewed and a system allowing for the giving of evidence by other means constructed within it. The continuing review of how evidence should be received to determine a fair outcome does not link the underlying purpose of the principle of orality with the numerous circumstances in which oral evidence may be modified for a variety of reasons. The impact across both civil and criminal proceedings is considered, and the effect of incremental change demonstrated. A model for future dispute resolution and fact finding is developed.

This thesis examines representations of the courtroom trial in Hollywood cinema produced between 1934 and 1966. The primary method is close textual analysis, which has been neglected in previous work on trial sequences in cinema. However, I argue that a rigorous engagement with both the conventions of the courtroom trial form and individual films’ use of these conventions requires close attention to the text. The introductory chapter identifies the dominant conventions, meanings and ideology underpinning Hollywood representations of the courtroom trial by looking at the treatment of space, character, procedure and drama in a number of films produced between 1957 and 1962 that serve as a representative sample of the conventions of trial representation in Hollywood cinema. I conclude that the narrative scenario of the courtroom trial tends to dictate a set of formal strategies that respect and affirm the American adversarial trial system. However, I also use this chapter to begin mapping out the ways in which individual films are able to nuance their representation of the courtroom trial despite its multitude of fixed components. My subsequent chapters examine how different genres and modes inflect the dominant representations of the courtroom trial as I look in detail at trial sequences in, respectively, the social problem film, the woman’s melodrama and film noir. This method involves firstly engaging with existing criticism on each genre and considering how previous definitions and identified conventions, meanings and representational strategies might be said to affect that particular genre’s representations of the courtroom trial. My second chapter examines representations of the courtroom trial in the social problem film, which I argue cleaves relatively closely to the representational model outlined in my introductory chapter. However, through close readings of two case studies, Dust Be My Destiny and Pinky, I also demonstrate the differences in how both films handle the didacticism and resolution that the trial form offers the social problem film, and identify competing voices in the text that complicate what could be viewed as a solely affirmative depiction of the court system. My third chapter examines representations of the courtroom trial in woman’s melodrama, employing as primary case studies Peyton Place and Madame X. My analyses of these films demonstrate how the female-centred melodrama can, to different degrees, challenge the patriarchal structures of the court by emphasising the female protagonist’s viewpoint. My final chapter looks at courtroom trial representations in film noir. I provide close readings of trial sequences in Stranger on the Third Floor and The Lady from Shanghai. Here I argue that noir’s use of the courtroom trial exemplifies the genre’s oft-situated difference from conventional forms in Hollywood cinema of the period. Noir trials consistently challenge notions of the adversarial trial system as the correct one for seeking justice.

Pre-recorded cross-examination offers unprecedented opportunities to focus on and regulate the treatment and questioning of intimidated complainants in sex offence cases. In this thesis, I investigate the application of s. 28 and related measures to adult complainants defined as "intimidated witnesses" under YJCEA 1999, s. 17(4). Methods comprised eight months court observation in s. 28 and non-s. 28 sex offence cases, including six months observing the extension of the s. 28 pilot to intimidated complainants and interviewing barristers working on those cases. Key findings include that the s. 28 pilot for intimidated complainants was hampered by a lack of planning, guidance and a clear rationale: intimidated complainants were perceived as less deserving of s. 28 and related measures compared to 'vulnerable' witnesses. Though cross examination of intimidated complainants tended to be slower and calmer at s. 28 hearings, compared to trial, adherence to best practice varied because barristers considered that training, guidance and toolkits on cross-examining 'vulnerable' witnesses did not apply to intimidated complainants. Importantly, procedural safeguards associated with the success of s. 28 for 'vulnerable' witnesses, such as Ground Rules Hearings and written questions, were hollowed out or deemed unnecessary by judges and barristers in intimidated s. 28 cases. Lastly, observations of sex offence trials reveal that pre-recorded testimony disrupted traditional understandings of adversarial trial and assumptions about how evidence should be presented in s. 28 cases. My research suggests an urgent need to review intimidated complainants' procedural status under the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999, and that detailed guidance is also required to develop the application of s. 28 and related measures in sex offence cases. More consistency in standards of defence advocacy, the exercise of case management powers, and the audio-visual quality of pre-recorded evidence is called for in sex offence cases.

This study examines the presentation and examination of DNA evidence in the English Criminal Courts, from the perspective of forensic experts. The methodology involved qualitative analysis of expert perception and opinion, through interview. Much activity has concerned the contribution of faulty expert evidence to miscarriages of justice, however forensic experts have been largely ignored as sources of valuable data. This study is original in specifically examining their experience. Criticisms of expert evidence in the English courts are commonly described as having their origins in detrimental effects of the adversarial trial system, however, the position supported by this study is that many claimed detrimental effects are based on misunderstanding of the workings of adversarial procedure. The study examined experts’ perceptions of challenges they faced in the presentation and examination of DNA evidence, including their duty to offer objective and unbiased opinion. The study determined that whilst experts may give ‘unbiased’ opinion, ‘impartiality’ was practically difficult to achieve because of the different roles played by prosecution and defence experts. Furthermore, a lack of clarity regarding the responsibilities implied by the requirement of remaining ‘unbiased’ meant that experts put different interpretations on their duties in this regard. This study concludes that the policy objectives underlying the concept of ‘unbiased’ should be examined, with a view to better defining appropriate expert responsibilities. The study investigated experience within court. Interviewees reported similar experiences to those faced by forensic experts reported in previous studies. However, evidence in this study supports the proposition that DNA evidence is qualitatively different from older forensic identification techniques. First, the complexity of DNA evidence magnifies many known trial ‘pathologies’ in terms of presentation and examination. Second, it is fundamentally different in that its probabilistic nature means that experts are forced to present it in a rigorously scientific manner. In this way, not only does DNA represent a new paradigm in forensic identification, but it must inevitably force existing tensions between the law and scientific evidence into the open. This study found experts to be generally passive in supplying the demands of the judicial process. This has included passivity in the face of legal rulings on how complex DNA evidence should be presented. From an evidential perspective, this is indubitably a judicial responsibility. This study supports the proposal, however, that steps must be taken to engage scientific experts in the scientific aspects of these determinations, if the ‘new paradigm’ of DNA evidence is not to be diluted. The Government must take a lead in co-ordinating expert bodies towards an integrated approach to complex evidence such as DNA, in the inevitable anticipation that future forensic technologies can only be more complex still. It may do this without infringing the over-riding interests of the adversarial system of justice.

Recent research has confirmed that giving evidence in criminal proceedings is often a degrading and gruelling ordeal for complainants in rape cases. This study seeks to establish the extent to which the secondary victimisation of rape complainants in court is an inevitable consequence of the adversarial trial process. It explores the conflict between the needs and interests of rape complainants and the basic assumptions of the adversarial fact-finding process and concludes that the adversarial system creates intractable problems for vulnerable complainants. This study questions whether our commitment to the adversarial process can and should continue given its onerous implications for victims of crime. This study examines rape trials in the Netherlands, a country with an inquisitorial trial process. It identifies the fundamental differences between Dutch and English trial procedures and explores their significance for complainants in rape cases. This study seeks to establish whether inquisitorial style proceedings hold significant advantages for vulnerable complainants.