Forensic Science and Expert Testimony in Wrongful Convictions
A Study of Decision-Making at the Criminal Cases Review Commission
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11516743 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Carolyn Hoyle (0000-0002-6352-5790, Centre for Criminology, Faculty of Law, University of Oxford, UK, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 59 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 919-937 |
| Publication date | 2018-11-23 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | The British Journal of Criminology (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0007-0955 • E-ISSN: 1464-3529 |
| Publisher | Oxford University Press (OUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1093/bjc/azy066 |
| OpenAlex | W2903883748 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 7 |
The Criminal Cases Review Commission reviews possible wrongful convictions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, referring back to the Court of Appeal cases where there is a ‘real possibility’ that the conviction is unsafe. This article presents findings from a four-year empirical study of decision-making within the Commission. It explores how Commission staff exercise their discretionary powers in identifying and investigating possible wrongful convictions from approximately 1,400 applications a year, referring just a few back to the Court. It focuses on a sample of cases that turned on forensic evidence and expert testimony, showing that while there is some variation in individual caseworkers’ approaches to investigation, decision-making is shaped by the law and internal policies such that reasonably consistent decision frames emerge
Appeal · Commission · Conviction · Criminal investigation · Criminology · Forensic science · Political science · Sample (material · Deception detection and forensic psychology · History · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Medical Malpractice and Liability Issues · Psychology
| Citations per year | 0.14 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2019 - 2019 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |