AC3.2
Draw conclusions from information
Safe verdicts
A safe verdict is one that is reached on the basis of all the relevant facts and evidence after a fair trial. To achieve a safe verdict, two things are needed:
The evidence must be admissible, reliable and credible, as well as sufficient to justify the verdict
Court procedures must have been followed correctly during trial
Unsafe verdicts
The Court of Appeal can quash a conviction made by a jury in the Crown Court if is unsafe. Unsafe verdicts are usually called unsafe or wrongful convictions.
A verdict may be unsafe for various reasons such as:
Error of law by the judge when directing the jury
Bias by the judge in summing up
Judge has refused to allow the jury to consider a defence
Material irregularity during the trial such as jurors contacting witnesses or carrying out research outside of the courtroom
Evidence not disclosed to defence before trial
Read this plain text Daily Mail article first: Dando case verdict safe, appeal judges told.
Then read The Guardian article about the the appeal: Barry George cleared of Jill Dando murder after retrial
Then complete your study of this case in your work book.
The Stephen Downing Case - Unsafe verdict
Just verdict
A fair verdict based on legal rules and evidence available
OJ Simpson
Miscarriages of justice
The conviction and punishment of a person for an offence they have not committed
Just sentencing
In order for a sentence to be considered just it needs to be neither too harsh nor too lenient. The Defendant can appeal against a sentence if it is too harsh. If the sentence is considered to be unduly lenient then the Attorney General can seek to appeal. Anyone can ask the Attorney General to review a sentence for certain types of crime.