Forensic Science Evidence, Wrongful Convictions and Adversarial Process
Dublin Core
Title
Forensic Science Evidence, Wrongful Convictions and Adversarial Process
Description
The adversarialist approach to criminal justice places a premium on autonomy, efficiency and finality. It trusts that giving parties control will put reliable comprehensive evidence before the trial court. Where forensic science evidence is involved, this trust is often misplaced, and factual accuracy suffers. Often, prosecution forensic science evidence is of unknown reliability and biased, yet the trial judge stays above the fray and allows its admission, the defence lacks the resources to challenge it successfully, and the jury defers to the expert and convicts. On appeal, the appeal court is wary of challenging the jury verdict and reluctant to allow the defence a recontest with bolstered evidence or a different strategy. Post appeal, the opportunities for correction are more limited still. The adversarialist approach to forensic science evidence has contributed to many wrongful convictions. Courts should adopt a more interventionist and informed approach to forensic science evidence.
Creator
Hamer, David
Edmond, Gary
Source
The University of Queensland Law Journal; Vol. 38 No. 2 (2019): Special issue on expert evidence; 185-236
1839-289X
0083-4041
10.38127/uqlj.v38i2
Publisher
The University of Queensland School of Law
Date
2020-02-18
Rights
Copyright (c) 2020 The University of Queensland Law Journal
Relation
Format
application/pdf
Language
eng
Type
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Peer-reviewed Article
Identifier
Collection
Citation
David Hamer and Gary Edmond, Forensic Science Evidence, Wrongful Convictions and Adversarial Process, The University of Queensland School of Law, 2020, accessed November 2, 2024, https://igi.indrastra.com/items/show/2621