RT Article
T1 Forensic science and expert testimony in wrongful convictions: a study of decision-making at the criminal cases review commission
JF The British journal of criminology
VO 59
IS 4
SP 919
OP 937
A1 Hoyle, Carolyn 1964-
LA English
YR 2019
UL https://krimdok.uni-tuebingen.de/Record/1668058057
AB 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.
K1 Criminal Cases Review Commission
K1 Court of Appeal
K1 Discretion
K1 Decision-making
K1 Forensic science
K1 Expert evidence
K1 Entscheidungsfindung
K1 Verurteilung
K1 Fehlurteil
DO 10.1093/bjc/azy066