International Commentary on Evidence最新文献_第2页

Misleading DNA Evidence: Reasons for Miscarriages of Justice 误导性DNA证据:司法不公的原因

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2014-06-18 DOI: 10.1515/ice-2014-0010

P. Gill

{"title":"Misleading DNA Evidence: Reasons for Miscarriages of Justice","authors":"P. Gill","doi":"10.1515/ice-2014-0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ice-2014-0010","url":null,"abstract":"This article is a brief review of my book “Misleading DNA Evidence: Reasons for Miscarriages of Justice”, published by Academic Press, Elsevier (Gill, 2014). It is nearly 30 years since the first demonstration of DNA profiling in forensic science. Since then, the technique has evolved remarkably. In the early days, only large “visible” crime-stains (e.g. blood, semen) were analysed. This was imposed by the relatively poor sensitivity relative to the today’s standards. There is an inherent advantage to the interpretation of macro-DNA samples, in that it is much easier to deduce the relevance of a supposed crime-stain to the crime-event itself. From the perspective of a court, the fact that a DNA profile may match a defendant is of secondary interest to the questions: “how” and “when” did the DNA-transfer take place? For a defendant to be found guilty, a court must be convinced that the DNA profile is associated with the crime-event itself. The forensic scientist attempts to apply “deductive logic” in order to associate the DNA profile with some other aspect of the case – it is not the “fact” of a matching DNA profile that is of primary interest, rather it is the “context” or the “relevance” of the DNA profile to the crime-event itself. To make deductive inferences, a chain of associations is implied. For example, the DNA profile may be found along with a positive test for blood. The scientist may deduce that the origin of the DNA is from blood – an association is made. The confirmation of a body fluid “source” is often sufficient to imply an “activity” – if blood is present then the prosecution may imply that the defendant or victim bled at the crime-scene; alternatively, the confirmation of semen may imply sexual assault. Once these associations have been accepted, the court’s task to decide the ultimate issue of guilt/innocence is a short step to take.","PeriodicalId":129839,"journal":{"name":"International Commentary on Evidence","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126203330","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 31

Patterns of Sexual Behaviour: The Law of Evidence: Back to the Future in Australia and England 性行为模式:证据法:回到澳大利亚和英国的未来

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2013-12-01 DOI: 10.1515/ICE-2014-0012

Q. C. Felicity Gerry, C. Sjölin, Gregor Urbas

{"title":"Patterns of Sexual Behaviour: The Law of Evidence: Back to the Future in Australia and England","authors":"Q. C. Felicity Gerry, C. Sjölin, Gregor Urbas","doi":"10.1515/ICE-2014-0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1515/ICE-2014-0012","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A recent Victorian Court of Appeal ruling Velkoski v The Queen [2014] VSCA 121 (18 June 2014). [in Australia] has sparked concerns that a clamp down on the way child abuse cases are handled could thwart convictions. The Court of Appeal justices ruled only cases that are “remarkably” similar would go before the same jury, making it harder for allegations from multiple complainants to be heard together. There are concerns that this will reduce the number of convictions for sexual offences, especially for those against children. Farnsworth, S., Tendency evidence: Concerns Court of Appeal ruling could thwart child abuse convictions (3 October 2014). http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-10-03/concerns-child-sex-ruling-could-thwart-convictions/5789952 accessed on 25 February 2015. This article explores the approach in England and Wales, and Australia to evidence of a pattern of behaviour, focussing on when it is adduced in cases involving sexual abuse. We first consider the shared common law history of the two jurisdictions before exploring how common law and legislative changes have led to surprisingly different positions in the two countries. We conclude by suggesting a simpler and more rational approach which has started to emerge and could be adopted in both countries, and indeed should be considered in any jurisdiction.","PeriodicalId":129839,"journal":{"name":"International Commentary on Evidence","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116965120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Anomalies of US Evidence Law 美国证据法的异常

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2012-01-10 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1128

J. Jackson

引用次数: 0

The Fourth Amendment's Exclusionary Rule: Blurring the Line Between Rule and Exception 第四修正案的排除规则:模糊规则与例外之间的界限

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2012-01-10 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1125

L. Heffernan

引用次数: 0

Confrontation and Compulsory Process: U.S. and European Approaches Compared 对抗与强制程序:欧美做法之比较

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2012-01-10 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1118

W. O’Brian

引用次数: 0

From Liberal Extremity to Safe Mainstream? The Comparative Controversies of Witness Preparation in the United States 从极端自由主义到安全主流?美国证人准备制度的比较争议

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2012-01-10 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1126

S. Vasiliev

{"title":"From Liberal Extremity to Safe Mainstream? The Comparative Controversies of Witness Preparation in the United States","authors":"S. Vasiliev","doi":"10.2202/1554-4567.1126","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2202/1554-4567.1126","url":null,"abstract":"This contribution examines the idea that partisan witness preparation in criminal trials in the United States amounts to a comparative anomaly in the common law context. In American procedure, parties are not constrained by straightforward rules and ethical canons in their choice and deployment of preparation techniques, save for a prohibition on subornation and use of perjury. The lax regulation of pre-trial witness interviews in the US contrasts with the stricter rules on professional conduct of barristers and prosecutors in England and Wales and the cautious attitude towards extensive witness preparation prevailing in Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. These divisions mark deep-seated differences between these countries in what fact-finding arrangements are deemed optimal in the criminal process and what importance is given to witness spontaneity as opposed to a leeway for parties to shape the evidence submitted for evaluation to the fact-finder. Although comparative divergence alone does not render the US approach anomalous, the difficulty of reconciling its liberal practice with the trial systems quest for the truth in a sense justifies this label. Some of the excesses of the current practice could be remedied and the truth-finding objective given a more prominent place in the criminal process if a stricter approach were taken towards the regulation of witness preparation in the US and legal and ethical norms were aligned more closely to establishing the truth. In distinguishing between ethical and unethical conduct, the rules should consider not only the mental element of counsel but also the objective effects of preparation on the authenticity and accuracy of witness recollection. While more research into such effects is needed, the article argues tentatively that the most suggestive and therefore objectionable techniques used in the US should be abandoned or subjected to more rigorous regulation.","PeriodicalId":129839,"journal":{"name":"International Commentary on Evidence","volume":"52 11","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2012-01-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114040393","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Comparative Observations on the Burden of Proof for Criminal Defences 刑事辩护举证责任之比较观察

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2012-01-10 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1119

H. L. Ho

引用次数: 0

Scientific Evidence in Europe -- Admissibility, Evaluation and Equality of Arms 欧洲的科学证据——可采性、评价与武器平等

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2011-11-15 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1123

C. Champod, J. Vuille

引用次数: 22

In Praise of the Jury Trial: A Review of Robert P. Burns' The Death of the American Trial 赞扬陪审团审判:罗伯特·p·伯恩斯《美国审判之死》书评

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2010-12-02 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1116

Andrew E. Taslitz

引用次数: 0

Bayes Wars Redivivus -- An Exchange 贝叶斯战争的重新传播——一次交换

International Commentary on Evidence Pub Date : 2010-11-01 DOI: 10.2202/1554-4567.1115

Roger C. Park, Peters Tillers, F. Moss, D. Michael Risinger, David H. Kaye, Ronald J. Allen, Samuel R. Gross, Bruce L. Hay, Michal Pardo, Paul F. Kirgis

引用次数: 12