The Nature of Applications to the Commission

C. Hoyle, Mai Sato
{"title":"The Nature of Applications to the Commission","authors":"C. Hoyle, Mai Sato","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780198794578.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter examines the nature of applications for wrongful convictions that the Criminal Cases Review Commission receives and the kinds of issues raised by applicants. It highlights the potential flaws of applications presented to the Commission, such as those relating to investigations conducted by police and prosecutors. It also reviews the extant literature on the sources of wrongful conviction to explain the range of possible misconduct and legal, scientific, or human error that might lead to an applicant being wrongfully convicted, or to believing themselves to be so. A number of sex cases and ‘expert evidence’ cases are discussed to illustrate the fallibility of witnesses, vulnerable suspects, the fallibility of science and expert testimony, due process failures, and the pervasive influence of prejudice and fear. The chapter concludes with some reflections on the changing nature of wrongful convictions over the past decade or two.","PeriodicalId":425336,"journal":{"name":"Reasons to Doubt","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reasons to Doubt","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780198794578.003.0005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This chapter examines the nature of applications for wrongful convictions that the Criminal Cases Review Commission receives and the kinds of issues raised by applicants. It highlights the potential flaws of applications presented to the Commission, such as those relating to investigations conducted by police and prosecutors. It also reviews the extant literature on the sources of wrongful conviction to explain the range of possible misconduct and legal, scientific, or human error that might lead to an applicant being wrongfully convicted, or to believing themselves to be so. A number of sex cases and ‘expert evidence’ cases are discussed to illustrate the fallibility of witnesses, vulnerable suspects, the fallibility of science and expert testimony, due process failures, and the pervasive influence of prejudice and fear. The chapter concludes with some reflections on the changing nature of wrongful convictions over the past decade or two.
向委员会提出申请的性质
本章探讨刑事案件审查委员会收到的冤假错案申请的性质,以及申请人提出的问题种类。它突出了提交给委员会的申请中可能存在的缺陷,例如那些与警察和检察官进行的调查有关的申请。它还回顾了关于错误定罪来源的现有文献,以解释可能导致申请人被错误定罪或认为自己被错误定罪的可能的不当行为和法律,科学或人为错误的范围。书中讨论了一些性案件和“专家证据”案件,以说明证人的不可靠性、易受伤害的嫌疑人、科学和专家证词的不可靠性、正当程序的失败以及偏见和恐惧的普遍影响。本章最后对过去一二十年来错判性质的变化进行了一些反思。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信