Exam (elaborations)
UNIT 3 CRIMINOLOGY AC3.1
- Module
- Crime Scene to Courtroom
- Institution
- WJEC
Examine information for validity - should take 1h and 15 minutes to type.
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
Hillsborough Disaster:Summary:
In 1989, a crush at Hillsborough Stadium in Sheffield during Liverpool's FA Cup semifinal match against
Nottingham Forrest resulted in the deaths of 97 spectators. allowing those who did not have tickets to
enter meant that the stadium was crowded and that no designated seats had been taken. Simply put,
everyone was working to support the objective. Instead of standing in a neat line as they should have,
people started getting excessively enthusiastic and attempted to force their way into the grounds.
People were not standing where they had been directed and instead were all crowding toward the goal
area, leaving a lot of open standing spaces. People were unable to exit due to the crushing when "pens"
were introduced. People were unable to move sideways to leave the area as a result. People in the
waiting area outside were so close together that they were unable to see the signs indicating how to
enter. People were just strolling down the tunnel to the standing area because they believed they would
have a better view than from the other sections; no one was enforcing it. Everyone was pushed forward
in a drastic manner, pushing themselves into the boundaries and the fence since nobody knew the game
had even begun. People began to ascend, hoping that someone would assist them in reaching higher
elevations. People were becoming so dizzy that they were fainting out. As soon as police inspectors
arrived on the field, the same had to cease. They started attempting to loft individuals onto the field.
Everyone rushed out through the gate as soon as one officer unlocked the pen, and the crushing began
once more. Some front-row passengers were squeezed to the point of fainting and having breathing
difficulties. People started passing away, while others became trapped in the middle.
Key Findings: Evidence admissible in court
Police then revised their original claims. Cctv was frequently used in court. Pictures of bodies were
utilised, which were stills from news video shot by reporters who came to cover the game. The first
fabrication made by Duckingfield was Liverpool supporters entering through escape tunnels despite his
orders for the gates to be opened. The ambulances were unable to enter the field because he did not
view this as an emergency. Because people were leaving without grabbing their keys, other others
couldn't pass. Stretchers were not being brought by ambulances. The 12 hospital deaths were followed
by everyone else's deaths on the field or in the stadium. However, a chief in Sheffield encouraged them
to put everything in nonetheless since he knew there would be an investigation. Normally, they were
required to put everything in their pocketbooks as it is a means for them to exhibit proof. (It should be
discussed in the disaster book.) They need proof that these individuals were intoxicated, as implied by
the media, so a coroner arrived to explain how people had died. He collected blood samples from every
body, including youngsters, to determine the alcohol content. In order to distinguish whose family was
whose and whether a member of their family had passed away, friends and relatives were requested to
move aside. T In order to cover up the crime, the police interviewed the families of the deceased and
inquired as to whether anybody had consumed alcohol at all.
Media Reports:
Two reporters who were there for the live broadcast claimed that one of the gates had been smashed
and Liverpool supporters were entering without tickets. The fans were then held responsible.
, They were reportedly inebriated and disorderly as well. The identical accounts about the damaged
turnstiles, the persons who were present being interviewed, and their claims that a police officer
unlocked the gates began to appear in the news reports as they began to cover the incident.
Jeremy Bamber:
Summary:
Jeremy Bamber, then 24 years old, was given a life sentence in prison for the 1986 murder of five
members of his adopted family at their Essex farmhouse. For the killings of his stepparents, sister, and
her two 6-year-old boys, Nicholas and Daniel, he received a term of at least 25 years in prison.
Bamber was given five life sentences by Judge Mr. Justice Drake, who described him as "warped and vile
beyond imagination." Police difficulties made it difficult to solve the contentious crime, and Bamber
stayed free on bail and supported by the money of his deceased parents while inquiries were made. He
continues to assert his innocence today, and the Criminal Cases Review Commission recently remanded
his case to the Court of Appeal in 2001. However, if the silencer had been on when she was slain, the
weapon would have been too long for her to grasp. He tried to place the blame on his sister, who was
known to suffer from schizophrenia, saying that she killed her family and then killed herself. Sheila
suffered two gunshot wounds to her neck, one of which was deadly and the other not. If Sheila had
intended to commit suicide, she would have made sure it occurred the first time.
Evidence admissible in court:
Key Findings: The silencer has hair and paint on it when it is discovered, which renders it untrustworthy
because it may have been tampered with. A month after the killings, Julie Mugford, Jeremy's fiancée,
told police that Jeremy had admitted to plotting to kill his family in order to acquire the estate. Police
call and call history records.
When Jeremy contacted the neighbourhood police department (rather than 911), he said his father had
called and stated, "Your sister has gone insane," and then the line went dead. The police recorded the
call from Mr. Bamber rather than Jeremy, and they also recorded the incorrect time (police error).
Photos taken by police of the murder scene that show the gun.
While sleeping close to Shelia in the accompanying stillness. Two people had gunshot wounds. It would
have taken too long for her to shoot herself if the silencer hadn't been fitted to the gun. Another image
shows the gun against the wall, indicating that the cops may have tampered with it. Additionally, the
authorities authorised the burning of all the beds, destroying valuable evidence. No physical signs of a
struggle were present.The prosecution countered that he was aware of a broken lock that might be used
to enter the residence.
Validity:
Circumstantial evidence was used instead of real proof, therefore they relied on claims like his desire to
inherit the money and his girlfriend's claim that he intended to kill his family. (Word-of-mouth
information) Julie Mugford's "evidence" had a lot of weight because it was the only piece of evidence
used, but she wouldn't reveal what it was. till they had split up, anything. (If this is accurate, she has
already lied, making her an unreliable source.)
Media Reports:
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
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
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
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 tegan2. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £3.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
79223 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