100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
Previously searched by you
Previously searched by you
logo
Summary Criminology Unit 3: AC 2.3 write up model answer £4.15   Add to cart
Quickly navigate to
Preview
  2.  
  3. WJEC
  4.  
  5. Criminology
  6.  
  7. Crime Scene to Courtroom

Summary

Summary Criminology Unit 3: AC 2.3 write up model answer

10 reviews
 1592 views  5 purchases

These are my answers that I used to achieve a near perfect 95/100 marks on the Year 13 Unit 3 Criminology controlled assessment. Of course, I changed it as needed during the exam, but these were the backbones of my answers. This resource covers AC 2.3. This detailed answer is well-developed after t...

[Show more]

Preview 1 out of 2  pages

Document information

  • No
  • Ac 2.3
  • January 13, 2023
  • 2
  • 2022/2023
  • Summary

Subjects

Connected book

book image

Book Title:

Author(s):

  • Edition:
  • ISBN:
  • Edition:

More summaries for

All for this textbook (41)

Written for

All documents for this subject (372)

10  reviews

review-writer-avatar

By: binderjitsandhux • 8 hours ago

review-writer-avatar

By: mariuscaraman56 • 7 months ago

review-writer-avatar

By: chadbuzz • 8 months ago

reply-writer-avatar

By: rin4 • 8 months ago

hiya :) thanks for leaving a review I'm sending the absolute best of luck for unit three!!!! if you have any questions feel free to ask :)

review-writer-avatar

By: pavandhanda2006 • 9 months ago

reply-writer-avatar

By: rin4 • 8 months ago

heya !! it's great that you found 2.3 useful -- thanks for leaving a review and good luck with unit three:) (or hope it went well if you've already done it !!)

review-writer-avatar

By: amrita90 • 10 months ago

reply-writer-avatar

By: rin4 • 10 months ago

i'm so pleased that 2.3 helped you out - good luck with unit three :) !!!!

review-writer-avatar

By: getleezaj • 11 months ago

reply-writer-avatar

By: rin4 • 10 months ago

hi, sorry to hear that you didn't find 2.3 helpful! :( i'd be super grateful if you could message me to let me know what about it you didn't find useful :) best of luck in all future exams :)

review-writer-avatar

By: esssaaa • 1 year ago

reply-writer-avatar

By: rin4 • 11 months ago

hi, sorry to hear that you didn't find 2.3 helpful! :( i'd really appreciate it if you could let me know what about it you didnt find helpful :) best of luck in all your future exams !!

Show more reviews  

Seller

avatar-seller
rin4

Reviews received

Content preview

AC 2.3: Understand Rules in Relation to the Use of Evidence in Criminal Cases

Not all evidence can be used in court because to be accepted it must be reliable, admissible, and
relevant to the case.

For evidence to be considered reliable, it must be credible, authentic, and accurate.
To be credible, the evidence must be believable from a reasonable source. For example, was the
witness telling the truth? However, honesty is not enough because prevailing conditions may make
the statement impossible to be true – for example, night-time might have obscured the witness’s
vision if the crime took place in the dark.
To be authentic, the evidence must be genuine. As an example, a document presented as evidence
cannot be authentic if it is a forgery.
For evidence to be accurate, it must be correct in its details. For example, is the evidence of an
expert supported by the rest of the scientific community? The case of Sir Roy Meadow is a key
example of when this does not happen, with his testimonies in court ultimately leading to him being
struck off the medical register. In court, Meadow testified against several women who lost their
babies. In Donna Anthony’s trial, he said that the chances of two babies dying in a family like hers
was around 1 in a million, leading to her being wrongly jailed. He also said that in Sally Clark’s family
the likelihood was “one in 73 million.” Clark was also wrongfully jailed. In Trupti Patel’s trial,
Meadow suggested that “two cot deaths is suspicious, three is murder,” although she was cleared of
all charges. Due to Meadow’s status, his testimonies seemed credible, but were in fact inaccurate.

Evidence must be considered relevant if it is to be used in court. The law splits evidence as being one
of two types of facts in a trial: ‘facts in issue’, otherwise known as ‘principal facts’, and ‘relevant
facts.’ Facts in issue are the matters in a case that the court has to decide about. The prosecution
attempts to prove these facts, whereas the defence attempt to disprove them. Relevant facts are
facts needed to prove or disprove the facts in issue and cannot be argued with.

Admissibility of evidence refers to whether it is allowed in court by the judge or magistrate. Evidence
can be inadmissible due to it having been collected improperly (such as through entrapments or
‘sting’ operations) or collected illegally (such as being discovered in a search without a warrant or
because of torture.) However, the court can accept improperly or illegally obtained evidence as
admissible if it will lead to a correct verdict. This is an example of ‘Probative vs Prejudicial,’ in which
it is considered more important to get a guilty verdict than to have a fair trial.
The case of Colin Stagg can be applied to both the admissibility and relevance of evidence. Following
the murder of Rachel Nickell, the police focused their investigations on Colin Stagg. No forensic
evidence linked him to the murder, but the police created ‘Operation Edzell’ - a honeytrap to elicit a
confession from him. However, Stagg never confessed. In 1994, Mr Justice Ognall excluded all
honeytrap evidence, ruling that the police had shown “excessive zeal” and “deceptive conduct” of
the grossest kind. The evidence was inadmissible due to being obtained improperly in a honeytrap
and through the police attempting to coerce Stagg, and none of what was collected could be
considered relevant to the case as a result.

Also playing a part in whether evidence can be used in court is pre-trial silence and bad character.
Pre-trial silence refers to the right to stay silent. However, in a criminal investigation, “no comment”
can be interpreted as a sign of guilt. Proof of bad character can also be admissible in court because
legal sanctions and documents are considered admissible. However, ‘contaminated’ evidence lacking
officiality is inadmissible.

All rules regarding disclosure come from the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Disclosure ensures a fair trial
by allowing both the prosecution and defence to be fully informed of all evidence and information –

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller rin4. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for £4.15. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

67474 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 14 years now

Start selling
£4.15  5x  sold
  • (10)
  Add to cart