Guilty Due To The Evidence And Facts example essay topic

The statement 'It is better that 10 guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer's umma rises and highlights the mistakes and injustices in the criminal justice system. In a just society, the innocent would never be charged, nor convicted, and the guilty would always be caught and punished. Unfortunately, it seems this would be impossible to achieve due to the society in which we live. Therefore, miscarriages of justice occur in the criminal justice system more frequently than is publicized or known to the public at large.

They are routine and would have to be considered as a serious problem in our society. The law is what most people respect and abide by, if society cannot trust the law that governs them, then there will be serious consequences including the possible breakdown of that society. In order to have a fair and just society, miscarriages of justice must not only become exceptional but ideally cease to occur altogether. A miscarriage of justice is basically 'a failure to attain the desired end result of justice'. In our society, every person should be treated equally and fairly as 'our legal institutions are premised on the idea that our legal system is both neutral and impartial, and that all persons are equal in the eyes of the law'. The country in which we were born, the language we speak, the colour of our skin and our gender should be of no relevance in deciding the outcome of justice.

All these notions are part of 'due process' and if this occurs in our society, why are there still miscarriages of justice? Our legal system is based on the fact that everyone deserves a fair hearing. In theory this is ideal, but due to human nature mistakes will always occur. The introduction of DNA into the courtroom (which can free innocent people wrongfully convicted of a crime twenty years ago) and Anderson's view on allowing juries to ask questions and participate more in trials (by stating the evidence on which they base their convictions), on the surface appear beneficial to the outcome of justice, and in some cases this will be the result. However, justice will always be hindered by humans and their corrupt side. Unfortunately, this is part of human nature and even the people in high positions are not immune.

When a person is accused of being 'guilty', society must assume the person is innocent until proven guilty. Anderson highlights the fact that the system is not designed in this way 'If guilty people do not deserve justice, why should we expect an entire system that runs on this assumption to deliver justice to anyone at all'. If we assume everyone who is accused of being guilty is in fact guilty, then a miscarriage of justice has already occurred. Society has not accorded the accused 'due process' and has already determined their opinion without all the facts and evidence. Therefore, they would not have been given a fair trial. Anderson further states ' the point is that innocence must be defined by justice, not justice by perceived innocence'.

In other words, if a person is guilty of a crime, then the law will prove that they are indeed guilty due to the evidence and facts surrounding the case. However, even a person 'who has in fact and with intent committed a crime could be said to have suffered a miscarriage if convicted on evidence which is legally inadmissible or which is not proven beyond reasonable doubt'. Whilst not inflicting the same degree (if any) of sympathy as an innocent person wrongfully convicted of a crime, the outcome is nevertheless a miscarriage as the person was not proved guilty by the facts of the case and a 'conviction arising from deceit or illegalities is corrosive of the states claims to legitimacy on the basis of due process and respect for rights'. Therefore, if a person is innocent, then the law will prove that they are innocent.

Unfortunately, the 'sufficiency of evidence actually required by the law to convict a person of murder is not always difficult to meet' (as demonstrated in the case of Ziggy Pohl). These factors demonstrate some of the many flaws in the criminal justice system when sentencing a person who has been accused guilty. In our society, people automatically assume those accused of being guilty are in fact guilty, and in order for miscarriages to cease, people need to change their views. The outcome of a case primarily depends upon the investigative methods of the police. 'They speak to all possible witnesses, arrange for all manner of forensic testing, and are in a powerful position to manipulate evidence'. Police misconduct is a major factor eventuating in miscarriages of justice.

They have at their disposal the ability to 'falsify evidence, intimidate witnesses, obtain admissions by threats, and are able to obstruct investigations'. In an investigation when 'police determine that a particular suspect is guilty their tasks will normally undertake a dramatic shift, from those of investigation to those of incrimination'. During this shift, the police may have overlooked many factors and not made sufficient inquiries. What things could they have done to stop an innocent person from being wrongfully convicted? Police may also turn a 'blind eye' to crimes in which it serves their purpose to do so. 'This behaviour greatly increases the risk of the innocent being wrongfully accused and the likelihood that the guilty will escape apprehension'.

Many authorities acknowledge that police corruption occurs throughout all levels but not much seems to be done about the fact. The Commission considers that 'there is now a system available which presents a substantial opportunity for any applicant armed with fresh evidence... to have a conviction reviewed on its merits' but 'the lack of investigators to carry out investigations to produce fresh evidence and the difficulties with legal aid' make it very tough for those who were the victims of corruption. Anderson highlights that the police 'target disadvantaged communities' in order to secure convictions. He states '95 per cent of all prisoners are male and 95 per cent also have not completed their secondary education; 65 per cent were unemployed at the time of imprisonment, and 15 per cent were Aboriginal'. These figures highlight the fact that people and groups are selected as guilty before they have committed any crime due to the circumstances surrounding their position in society and their ethnic background. Being wrongfully convicted of a crime is made even worse because once in prison there is little chance of an appeal and if the case makes it to a hearing, there are rarely any acquittals.

The court will rarely say the original judgement was wrong and the person was innocent - only that the conviction was unsafe. The law does not like to make mistakes, and when it does, rarely admits to them. However, in order to fix a situation or problem, people must first acknowledge there is something that needs to be fixed. If the law cannot admit it has its faults, then there is no way of improving it, as without its recognition that something needs to be changed, it will remain static and the same miscarriages of justice will continue to occur. 'Whilst most would accept that it is unjust to punish an innocent person, the assumption is widely shared and promoted that the major problem resides, not in the risk of wrongful conviction, but in the obstacles to convicting and punishing the guilty'. When people think of miscarriages of justice they involuntarily think that an innocent person has unjustly been convicted, they tend to ignore or not contemplate the double-sided nature of miscarriages.

Not only is it the wrongful conviction of an innocent person but also the failure to apprehend the real criminal offender. This is what makes miscarriages so problematic, it has many negative effects as the real criminal offender is still in the society in which he or she broke the law, and also an innocent person wrongfully suffers. Wilson states that two American criminologists (Kallen & Zeisel) estimate 350 people this century were wrongly sentenced to death and 25 were actually executed. Another study estimates that 1 or 2 miscarriages occur for every 200 people convicted of a felony. Wilson also states that reports have been made on 20 cases of murder or manslaughter in Australia where either a conviction was quashed or the Commission cast substantial doubt on the original conviction. Some people may think these figures appear to be relatively low but due to the serious nature of the punishment and penalties imposed, 1 or 2 miscarriages for every 200 persons convicted is 1 or 2 too many.

When dealing with such serious issues, the greatest care must be taken, and mistakes must not occur at this level, as it can cost people their life and their freedom. These figures are definitely not exceptional and occur more frequently than most people think. Another disturbing factor is that if this can occur in serious criminal cases where you would expect the highest standards of investigative and forensic competence, it is terrible to think what would happen in less serious crimes. It is important to note the majority of people assume miscarriages occur infrequently due to the fact that they have only ever heard of a few instances (e.g. The Chamberlain case). However, due to the triviality of the crimes in the lower courts, they would be dealt with in a very quick and ad-how fashion and under these circumstances miscarriages of justice would definitely be more routine than they are exceptional. The public is unaware of these cases due to the lack of media coverage which would definitely surround the more serious cases.

Wilson states 'once a decision to launch prosecutions is made, public officials and Crown prosecutors do everything possible to make charges 'stick'. Police verbals, unreliable police informants and distorted records of interview result from the pressure to ensure convictions occur and to 'win' at any cost'. Given these facts, it is not surprising so many people plead guilty in our courts due to the pressure placed upon them by the police and also lawyers. Lawyers will often advise their clients to plead guilty (even when their client maintains their innocence) because the lawyer believes their client has no concrete chance of winning if not admitting to the crime.

The high rate of guilty pleas demonstrates that many innocent people are pleading guilty to crimes they didn't commit, and therefore are experiencing miscarriages of justice. People often overlook the fact that in less serious crimes the defendant will plead guilty in order to receive a better deal. The theories of Anderson, Hogg, Walker and Wilson are justified opinions and could be advantageous to the criminal justice system. However, even if these theories are implemented into our society, corruption will still always occur. Unfortunately, it is just part of human nature. It is futile to establish new methods of judgement without considering the fact that corruption occurs throughout all levels of society.

Juries, police, and lawyers can all be persuaded and succumb to corruption if it suits their needs to do so. Likewise, DNA samples can be tampered with or plagued by human error. It is a vicious circle and until human beings change, miscarriages will continue to occur. Miscarriages of justice are definitely not exceptional and occur much more frequently than most people realise. They place a great burden on our society as a whole and cause injustices and hardships to many people. Just because we do not hear about them, does not mean they don't exist.

As Walker states 'since justice is applied by fallible, prejudiced human beings, miscarriages are inevitable'.