Relevant, Reliable, and Competent Ashley Cooper October 26, 2013 Criminal Evidence For this assignment, provide definitions for these three qualities of evidence. Additionally, find a criminal court case that contains an example of relevant, reliable or competent evidence. You can use findlaw.com or other search engines to locate a useful case. What are the basic facts of the case? What is the evidence that is relevant, reliable or competent?
Criminal Procedure: From First Contact to Appeal 5e Chapter 2 Summary 1. Summarize the exclusionary rule and the issues associated with it. ● A number of legal remedies are available for addressing violations of people’s rights, including those provided by the law, court decisions, and police policy and procedures. The most common remedies in criminal procedure are (1) the exclusionary rule; (2) criminal liability; (3) civil litigation; and (4) nonjudicial remedies. ● The exclusionary rule is the main remedy that will be focused on throughout the remainder of this book.
173 Reflective Journal. Week 1: Aims of the criminal Justice system This week was essentially an introductory topic and provided me with a basic understanding of the aims and operations of the criminal justice system. I learned that there is a number of different steps within the criminal justice system and the involvement of all the parties involved such as police, judge and jury and the defence. According to John Champion the main purpose of the criminal justice system is to process and prosecute individuals who commit crimes against society and to deal out suitable punishments for these individuals. This is a pivotal part in terms of maintain the functioning of society and to ensure that people don’t go around breaking laws wherever and whenever they want.
Police officers have to go on the possibility, supreme trustworthiness of police fact finding, treats the person(s) arrested as if he or she were found guilty (N.A., 2008). Crime Control Model Each system was designed by Herbert Packer, a Stanford University law professor, with the intentions to represent the two competing systems of values that operate within our criminal justice system. In this paper we will attempt to compare and contrast the role of the due process and crime control models have on shaping criminal procedure policy. We will review and assess the impact
The statement, “No matter how strong the prosecution’s evidence may be, if the magistrate or the jury has any reasonable doubt that he or she is guilty, the accused is entitled to be acquitted” proves that there should be no doubt when convicting a person. The standard of proof and evidence that the adversary system employs are among the
Case Analysis Assignment-The Trial of Orenthal J. Simpson April 7th, 2013 Fundamentally, the burden of proof falls on the prosecution and means that they are required to present evidence during a trial that must prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that the defendant did in fact commit the crime they are being charged with. The burden of proof entails that the prosecution present evidence that is accurate of the guilt of the defendant and in addition persuade the jury that the evidence presented establishes that guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The Latin meaning of prima facie is first look. It refers to criminal prosecution wherein the evidence previous to the trial is satisfactory to prove a case except there is significant ambiguous evidence given at the trial. Subsequent to the prosecution putting on the total of its evidence, the defense attorney will customarily ask for a dismissal of the charges due to lack of sufficient evidence.
“Forensic evidences in Criminal Trial: Need of the Hour” Introduction: Indian Evidence Act is uniform Evidence Act for whole of India, In India, law regarding evidence is uniform in both Civil and criminal cases, the degree of proof required may be somewhat different in civil and criminal cases but mode of giving evidence is govern by same legislation. So far as criminal jurisprudence in India is concerned doctrine of onus probandi is in the field and therefore “One shall be presume innocent till his crime is proved” not only proved but proved beyond reasonable doubt, this principle of Onus probendi is recognized under chapter of the Evidence Act which has restricted use of forensic science in criminal trials in India. It is very difficult to say anything beyond reasonable doubt so far as techniques of ascertaining fact with the help of forensic science is concerned. But with the passes of time modern techniques developed in the field of Forensic science are capable of ascertaining facts somewhat beyond reasonable doubt. In this background it is more appropriate to conduct a study in the recent Judgments of Supreme Court of India to see the change in the approach and attitude of Judiciary in appreciating forensic evidences in Criminal cases.
(Standard of proof. n.d.) In a criminal case the state must prove that the defendant is guilty “beyond a reasonable doubt” and has fulfilled each part of the statutory definition of the crime. An example of a criminal case would be first degree murder, because it contains the three basic elements of a crime: willfulness, deliberation and premeditation. However the standard of proof in a civil case is proven by lower standards of
Lets get to the Defense. The defense attorney has the job of proving that the defendant is innocent without a shadow of a doubt. Even if it looks like he or she may have done it it is morally right to defend that person until he or she if proven guilty without a shadow of a doubt. This is a lot of weight to have on ones shoulders. The fate of another human being is in your hands.
This tells us that civil law is for individual interest while criminal law is for public interest. It is not only the name that differs from the two categories of civil law and criminal law, the way of reaching a clear cut judgment is also relevant. In presenting evidence to indicate the defendant to be guilty has to be “clear and convincing evidence” and in criminal cases the substantial amount of evidence according to the same source has to be “Beyond a reasonable doubt” in order to prove the defendant to be guilty. Civil cases brought to court under this category are usually associated with personal disputes that can be sorted out with payments. Cases that are usually brought to court for civil law related matters are like copyright infringements, debt, evictions, partnership and inheritance disputes (under £30,00 dealt with at county court, any amount over £50,000 is sent straight to High Court) and other common complaints.