A Serious Defect in Criminal Justice

The HeraldJanuary 12, 2005

Linked as:

Summary


THE Blunkett inquiry has been criticised on the grounds that its open verdict reaches no conclusion but an open verdict may be more honest than a clear decision. Had Blunkett been tried under criminal procedure he would have been found not guilty which may be true, but it is also unsatisfactory because not-guilty verdicts are default decisions arising not from proving innocence, but from failure to prove guilt. The courts should not be in the business of rewarding criminals who successfully conceal evidence.

Many scientists feel that a serious defect in criminal justice is the lack of a back-burner. Scientific investigations are often inconclusive, but unlike the courts we do not apply default decisions. We put them on the back-burner and in due course new evidence may resolve the issues.

See the full content of this document

Extract


A Serious Defect in Criminal Justice

Indeed, modern physics and its important conseque...

See the full content of this document

Sponsored links




ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

ver las páginas en versión mobile | web

© Copyright 2012, vLex. All Rights Reserved.

Contents in vLex United Kingdom

Explore vLex

For Professionals

For Partners

Company