Overig
WJEC Criminology Unit 3 AC2.3 full mark exam answer
- Vak
- Instelling
This is the write-up I used for AC2.3 in the Unit 3 controlled assessment. I got full marks for this. This is an example and should not be copied out in an exam.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 1 van de 2 pagina's
Voorbeeld 1 van de 2 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
gesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
rosie1245
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
AC2.3In order for evidence to be used in trial it has to meet certain criteria:
Relevance and admissibility: Evidence must be reliable - meaning believable, genuine (not forgery),
and correct - in order to be used in court.
Evidence must also be relevant. There are two types of fact which relate to relevance. These are:
facts in issue and relevant facts. Facts in issue are facts used by the prosecution which the defence
try to dispute in trial; they are sometimes called principal facts. For example, proving intent to kill in
a murder trial. Relevant facts are those needed in order to prove or disprove facts brought up in trial
such as DNA found on a murder weapon.
Admissibility is also important when looking at evidence. This means evidence can’t be used if it
illegally or improperly obtained (unless value outweighs risk of an unfair trial). This is stated in PACE
1984 whereby the court can exclude evidence which is acquired illegally or improperly. In the case of
the Birmingham 6, six men were accused of the Birmingham pub bombings. They were later
acquitted as it was discovered that they had been treated illegally during questioning and that the
police had fabricated evidence. This is an example of police breaking PACE laws, making evidence
obtained through these methods inadmissible. Also, character evidence – things about a defendant’s
character used against or to support them in court – is usually inadmissible and can only be used in
certain situations, such as telling the jury that the defendant is known to lie. Under the Criminal
Justice Act 2003, bad character evidence such as past convictions and disciplinary records can be
used as evidence in some cases. Another type of evidence which is usually inadmissible is The Right
to Silence. This is the defendants’ right to refuse to answer questions in interviews and in court.
Under the Criminal Justice Act and Public Order Act 1994 a suspect not testifying in court can be
used to suggest guilt, unless a reasonable explanation is given. However, refusal to answer questions
cannot be used alone to secure a conviction.
Disclosure of evidence: This is where the defence team has a right to see any materials that will be
part of the trial against them and is laid out in the Criminal Procedures and Investigations Act 1996.
This includes evidence that is unused, but relevant to the case, and things which the prosecution has
which could assist or undermine the defence. The prosecution must disclose all this evidence and
show it to the defence. However, the prosecution can apply for Public Interest Immunity where they
don’t have to disclose evidence. This is usually used in ‘sensitive’ cases or to protect identity. The
defence should also disclose evidence which they will use in court, but they don’t have to disclose
unused evidence. Deliberately withholding evidence is a criminal offence as it perverts the course of
justice. In 2016, in the UK, over 900 people had charges dropped due to a failure to disclose
evidence. This number has since increased with over 1,600 cases collapsing between June 2020 and
June 2021 because of this issue. In the case of Liam Allen, who was accused of rape and sexual
assault, the prosecution failed to disclose text messages from the complainant’s phone, which
showed Allen’s innocence. It was only after the trial had begun, 2 years after Allen’s arrest, that the
defence received these messages and the case fell through. Allen could have been cleared much
earlier had these messages been revealed.
Hearsay rule and exceptions: Hearsay is when a witness appearing in court talks about a statement
made by someone outside of court. This is often labelled ‘second hand’ evidence. This evidence is
inadmissible, as set out in the Criminal Justice Act 2003. However, there are some exceptions to this
rule. Hearsay evidence may be admissible: when the defence, prosecution, and judge all agree that it
can be used; when it is ruled to be in the interest of justice, by the judge; where it is allowed by
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper rosie1245. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €3,70. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 66579 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen