Criminology unit 3
3.1 – Examine information for validity
When using different sources of information as evidence within a criminal
case/investigation, the validity of the information must be established initially. Validity
refers to the extent in which a piece of information is factually correct and legally
acceptable. During a criminal case, certain sources of information such as: evidence, trial
transcripts, media reports, judgements and law reports need to be validated.
Validity of Evidence
The validity of evidence is very important within a criminal investigation, this is because
ultimately it is the evidence which is used to reach a verdict for a case. The prosecution and
defence team present evidence to a judge or jury in a trial. The judge/jury then have the
role of determining the validity of the evidence. However, before the evidence is presented
in a court, the CPS will first evaluate the evidence. The CPS will evaluate if the evidence is
admissible, reliable and credible. For example, in order for evidence to be admissible, it
must be collected in the correct way. Physical evidence must be collected, transferred,
stored and analysed in the correct way by specialist personnel. Furthermore, the CPS will
use the Full Code Test in order to check the validity of evidence. For evidence to be reliable,
it must be collected from a trustworthy source. For example, a reputable expert. Evidence,
must also not be forged for it to be valid. In order for evidence to be credible, the evidence
must be believable based on the circumstances at the time of the evidence being gathered.
For example, could a witness have seen a certain crime unfold from where they were
positioned, or is it a false claim. Due to the fact that the CPS has to examine evidence
presented by a prosecution team first, means that the evidence is valid to an extent, but it
not guaranteed.
Witnesses/Testimonial
Eye-witness testimonies are a valuable source of information when it comes to evidence
within a criminal case. However, although juries usually place great weight on eye-witness
accounts, they may not always be valid. Research has shown that 75% of false convictions
within the UK, are the result of inaccurate eye-witness testimonies. Furthermore, many
convictions primarily based on eye-witness accounts are overturned when more reliable
evidence such as DNA is found later in the investigation. Loftus and Palmer conducted
research which suggests that the memory of a witness, is a factor which may affect the
validity of a witness testimony. They concluded that events which a witness may recall and
produce as evidence may be inaccurate due to memory erosion. This is because factors such
as the time in which the event took place, and how long ago the individual witnessed the
event, can affect the individual's ability to recall information when asked to do so.
Therefore, when an individual is asked to produce a witness statement, the information may
be inaccurate and lack currency, due to the duration of time between when the information
was acquired and recalled. The validity of a witness testimony can also be affected by the
use of leading questions within the interview process. This is because it can produce a
biased response from the witness, as the question they are asked may distort their ability to
recall events accurately. This would then result in the witness giving a subjective or
, Criminology unit 3
particular opinion/answer instead of an objective one. This would be because of the
interviewer potentially suggesting a certain thing, leading to the evidence produced being
potentially inaccurate. For example, a weapon may be placed at the crime scene when it
wasn’t there in reality.
Evidence which is provided by expert witnesses are usually regarded as having good validity,
this is because experts tend to be highly educated and have specialised knowledge within a
specific field. They then apply this knowledge to their work to produce an objective result in
relation to the evidence. Much like witness testimonies, the jury can place great weight on
evidence provided by an expert. However, expert evidence may not always be correct as
they can make mistakes, this was the case of Sally Clark, who was wrongfully convicted for
the murder of her two sons due to a major statistic provided by an expert being inaccurate.
This statistic was that the chances of both infants dying of SIDS was 73 million to one.
However, the accurate statistic was that once you have suffered one cot death, the chances
of a second are 60 to 1. Furthermore, there were 3 experts involved in this case and there
was concern for the validity and reliability of the evidence when there was a contrast
amongst their opinions. This may have been because the experts may have produced a
biased opinion in order to uphold their reputation.
Validity of Trial Transcripts
A trial transcript is a documented proceeding in a Crown Court trials. It is a written record of
everything that is mentioned within a trial. This means that there is no bias or additional
opinion within the trial transcript, as it only includes information which is being said within
the trial. This also means that trial transcripts do not lack currency as they are produced as
the words are being said within a trial. Trial transcripts used to be written by a
stenographer, but now it is done digitally. Anyone can request/apply for a copy of a trial
transcript, but the court may refuse to provide one in certain circumstances such as, if the
court hearing was private or the transcript involved classified government information. Trial
transcripts are produced to ensure that the rights of the defendant are upheld if they decide
to appeal. In addition to this, they are a good source of information to refer back to if the
Parole Board find it necessary. For example, they may want to review the advice previously
given to them by a judge. The trial transcript may not be subject to bias, however, since the
trial transcript is produced digitally, there may be an error which may occur leading to
words being missed or inaccurate. The accuracy of trial transcripts is also valid because
crown court hearings are recorded however, magistrate hearings are not recorded.
Validity of Media Reports
Media reports are another piece of information which can have an impact within a criminal
case. When it comes to media reporting there may be a significant political bias present
within the articles and reports they produce. There are a variety of different media outlets
within the UK, with some prominent ones being: The Sun, The Daily Mail and The Mirror.
Media outlets such as ‘The Sun’ and ‘The Daily Mail’ tend to express more left-wing
views/opinions and produce information which supports/favours political parties such as
the labour party. ‘The Mirror’, on the other hand, tend to express more right-wing
