The Role Of Mistakes In The Criminal Justice System
A Life Changing Mistake
Throughout history countless mistakes have been made, and lives have been drastically changed from these transgressions. An example of a great mistake is sanctioning Hitler’s rise to power. Although people are not aware of what the outcome may be, they still pull through. When one makes a mistake, others tend to cast blame. When one blames another person, others incline to be persuaded into believing invalid truths. An amalgamation of these two actions leads to a major problem in the justice system. By examining the burden of proof, the effects of corruption and relevant Canadian cases, one will understand that the criminal justice system if flawed and the wrongfully convicted deserve justice.
Firstly, the difficulty of proving someone is either guilty or innocent may cause one to be wrongfully convicted. One can be mistaken for another based on evidence that is invalid or irrelevant to the case. “A look-alike innocent person can be mistaken for the person who committed the crime” …show more content…
(Gardner 269). A mistaken eyewitness could be used to persuade the jury, yet the eyewitness may not be talking about the right person. Although they think it is the person who committed the crime, it may not be, thus proving the flawed justice system. In the book Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases it is mentioned that memory decays rapidly as well as everything we see is not recorded in the brain. Another type of mistaken evidence could be DNA placed on the crime scene. Individuals now-a-days have become very smart and know how to hide evidence and get away with the crime. An example of this is leaving another person’s fingerprints all over the murder weapon.
Also, one can be put behind bars due to a lack of evidence. This would most likely occur in older cases. This type of flaw usually does not happen today because of the advances in technology. In older cases judges would be mislead because there would be barely any evidence for them to provide a final decision. This causes the jury to almost guess, which will make their decision very inaccurate and possibly wrongfully convict someone.
Finally, ones rights may be violated and a perpetrator could get off clean due to inadmissible evidence. “The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement personnel. If the search of a criminal suspect is unreasonable, the evidence obtained in the search will be excluded from trial” (The Free Dictionary). This includes a policeman not reading someone their rights. A police man may have a lot on their mind at this point in time and could forget. Something as simple as this allows a person who clearly committed the crime to be free instead of behind bars. This proves that with improper police training or stupidity the justice system is flawed. An example of this is R. V. Hufsky; where a police man made a random spot check and noticed the smell of alcohol on Hufsky’s breath. The officer asked him to perform a breathalyser test, but he refused and was charged under the criminal code. In the court Hufsky argued that the random stopping of motor vehicles violated his s.9 rights and got away free.
Secondly, one may be affected directly because of the corruption in the justice system. There is always a way to get around things, the loopholes in the justice system cause it to be doubted by society. A major loophole in the justice system is a violation of rights. This loophole has been come across in many cases and has allowed criminals to walk on Canadian streets freely. An example of this is the case R. v. Manninen; he was arrested by two police officers for armed robbery. Charles Manninen said he was not going to say anything until he could talk to his lawyer, but the police kept carrying on with questions. The police violated his rights under section 10 – the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right. Although Charles admitted to committing the crime, his rights were violated and the conviction was dropped. Another point to add is sometimes the police may search something without a warrant, but this is only under exigent circumstances. Some may raise the question of; what are exigent circumstances? Some may also argue against it if they are violated in this way. The criminal justice system has so many things to watch out for, thus proving that it is flawed. Furthermore, a lawyer may be able to persuade the jury into believing something that is untrue. In today’s society it is very evident that some people are better than others at certain jobs. The definition of the burden of persuasion is “the affirmative duty of a party to establish his or her right to judicial relief by convincing the trier of fact, the judge or the jury, that the facts asserted are true and support the allegations” (The Free Dictionary). Some lawyers may be more persuasive than others and this will persuade the jury into believing their side. An example of where persuasion was a big factor was the OJ Simpson case. OJ spent a large amount of money on lawyers and other trained professionals to prove that he was innocent. On top of that, he persuaded the jury with his acting. He was supposed to try on the gloves, and he made it look like the gloves wouldn’t fit on his hands. Although OJ was not innocent, he got off free because of persuasion. To end, not only the wrongfully accused are affected, but also the immediate family is punished both physically and emotionally.
It affects the parents, wife, children, siblings, etc. Being sent to jail for life is almost like the death. This person is in prison for the rest of their life; you can rarely see them, talk to them, do the things you used to with them, etc. One has to adapt to these changes and they can be very tough to overcome. It is said that “there can be up to a 70% increase in death of the surviving spouse within the first six months” (Medicine Net). This goes to show how much added stress is upon members of the family. This person may go through stages of grief and mourning. A wrongful conviction has the power to destroy a family where there would be no destruction had the conviction been distributed correctly. If the prisoner is exonerated and had their name cleared, it is said that they will live a much tougher life then they had
before. Lastly, real life situations have occurred that legitimately prove the justice system is flawed. Initially, the case of David Milgaard proves one of the many mistakes that have been made in the criminal justice system. He was charged with the murder of Gail Miller in January 1970 and was sentenced to life in prison. Joyce Milgaard (his mother) believed that he was innocent from day one, so she did whatever she could to keep the case alive. He spent more than two decades in prison before Justice Minister Kim Campbell ordered the Supreme Court to review the conviction. In 1997 Milgaard was cleared by DNA evidence and was free from prison. In 1999 the Saskatchewan government awarded him ten million dollars for his wrongful conviction. Later that year, a man named Larry Fisher was found guilty of the rape and stabbing death of Gail Miller. An innocent man took someone else’s conviction for over two decades. Although he was awarded ten million dollars, no money will ever buy back the missed memories for the twenty years that he missed. Next, the case of Donald Marshall will prove that the people in the justice system can be unreliable. In 1971Donald Marshall (who was only seventeen) was accused of murdering his friend Sandy Seale in a Nova Scotia park. He served eleven years in prison before he was released after the RCMP reviewed his case. He was cleared and declared not guilty. He was told that he had contributed to his own conviction. Marshall was a Mi’kmaq, which is a type of first nations person who lives in Nova Scotia. There was systematic racism that contributed to his wrongful conviction. Many were in on it, police, judges, Marshall’s defence lawyers, Crown lawyers, etc. Rob Ebsary, was convicted of manslaughter in Seale’s death and only spent a year in jail. Marshall died in August 2009, he was only 55. He died at such a young age because of what he went through as a child; he spent most of his childhood in prison, which can permanently damage a human being. An innocent man went to jail for eleven years of his life all because of his background. Finally, the case of Steven Truscott will prove that misleading evidence can lead to a wrongful conviction. Truscott was sentenced to be hanged at the age of fourteen in 1959. He was on death-row for the murder and rape of Lynne Harper. Witnesses said they witnessed Truscott giving Harper a ride up by the highway (which was right beside the forest). Truscott witnessed her get into the car and they drove away. Then the same witness said they saw him ride back alone about 10 minutes later. Her body was found two days later not too far from where Truscott dropped her off. Thankfully his original death sentence was changed to life imprisonment. He was paroled in 1969, and he moved somewhere in southern Ontario. On August 28, 2007 (48 years later) the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned Truscott’s conviction and acquitted him. In July 2008, the Ontario government announce they would pay him 6.5 million dollars in compensation. This innocent man easily could have been hanged due to a lack of evidence. Although he was compensated all of that money, his life was drastically changed forever and he will never be able to take it back.
Throughout history many mistakes have been made and lives have been drastically changed as a result of these mistakes. By examining the burden of proof and its imperfections such as mistaken evidence, lack of evidence and improper police work. Secondly, by examining the effects of corruption, including loopholes in our legal system, the persuasion of jury by litigators and the family of the victim being directly affected. Thirdly by examining Canadian cases such as Truscott, Morin and Marshall, it will become evident that our justice system is imperfect and the wrongfully convicted deserve justice.
Works Cited
Boer, Peter. Wrongfully Convicted : the Innocent in Canada. Canada: Quagmire Press, 2007. Print. .
“Burden of Persuasion.” The Free Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 May 2011. .
CBC. “Canada’s Wrongful Convictions.” Cbcnews. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2011. .
“DNA Evidence.” The Free Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 May 2011. .
Dryden-Edwards, Roxanne. “Gried: Loss of a Loved One.” MedicineNet. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2011. .
“Exclusionary Rule.” The Free Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 May 2011. .
Gardner, Thomas J, and Terry M Anderson. Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases. New York: Wadsworth, 2009. Google Books. Web. 10 May 2011. .
Throughout history countless mistakes have been made, and lives have been drastically changed from these transgressions. An example of a great mistake is sanctioning Hitler’s rise to power. Although people are not aware of what the outcome may be, they still pull through. When one makes a mistake, others tend to cast blame. When one blames another person, others incline to be persuaded into believing invalid truths. An amalgamation of these two actions leads to a major problem in the justice system. By examining the burden of proof, the effects of corruption and relevant Canadian cases, one will understand that the criminal justice system if flawed and the wrongfully convicted deserve justice.
Firstly, the difficulty of proving someone is either guilty or innocent may cause one to be wrongfully convicted. One can be mistaken for another based on evidence that is invalid or irrelevant to the case. “A look-alike innocent person can be mistaken for the person who committed the crime” …show more content…
(Gardner 269). A mistaken eyewitness could be used to persuade the jury, yet the eyewitness may not be talking about the right person. Although they think it is the person who committed the crime, it may not be, thus proving the flawed justice system. In the book Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases it is mentioned that memory decays rapidly as well as everything we see is not recorded in the brain. Another type of mistaken evidence could be DNA placed on the crime scene. Individuals now-a-days have become very smart and know how to hide evidence and get away with the crime. An example of this is leaving another person’s fingerprints all over the murder weapon.
Also, one can be put behind bars due to a lack of evidence. This would most likely occur in older cases. This type of flaw usually does not happen today because of the advances in technology. In older cases judges would be mislead because there would be barely any evidence for them to provide a final decision. This causes the jury to almost guess, which will make their decision very inaccurate and possibly wrongfully convict someone.
Finally, ones rights may be violated and a perpetrator could get off clean due to inadmissible evidence. “The Fourth Amendment protects against unreasonable searches and seizures by law enforcement personnel. If the search of a criminal suspect is unreasonable, the evidence obtained in the search will be excluded from trial” (The Free Dictionary). This includes a policeman not reading someone their rights. A police man may have a lot on their mind at this point in time and could forget. Something as simple as this allows a person who clearly committed the crime to be free instead of behind bars. This proves that with improper police training or stupidity the justice system is flawed. An example of this is R. V. Hufsky; where a police man made a random spot check and noticed the smell of alcohol on Hufsky’s breath. The officer asked him to perform a breathalyser test, but he refused and was charged under the criminal code. In the court Hufsky argued that the random stopping of motor vehicles violated his s.9 rights and got away free.
Secondly, one may be affected directly because of the corruption in the justice system. There is always a way to get around things, the loopholes in the justice system cause it to be doubted by society. A major loophole in the justice system is a violation of rights. This loophole has been come across in many cases and has allowed criminals to walk on Canadian streets freely. An example of this is the case R. v. Manninen; he was arrested by two police officers for armed robbery. Charles Manninen said he was not going to say anything until he could talk to his lawyer, but the police kept carrying on with questions. The police violated his rights under section 10 – the right to retain and instruct counsel without delay and to be informed of that right. Although Charles admitted to committing the crime, his rights were violated and the conviction was dropped. Another point to add is sometimes the police may search something without a warrant, but this is only under exigent circumstances. Some may raise the question of; what are exigent circumstances? Some may also argue against it if they are violated in this way. The criminal justice system has so many things to watch out for, thus proving that it is flawed. Furthermore, a lawyer may be able to persuade the jury into believing something that is untrue. In today’s society it is very evident that some people are better than others at certain jobs. The definition of the burden of persuasion is “the affirmative duty of a party to establish his or her right to judicial relief by convincing the trier of fact, the judge or the jury, that the facts asserted are true and support the allegations” (The Free Dictionary). Some lawyers may be more persuasive than others and this will persuade the jury into believing their side. An example of where persuasion was a big factor was the OJ Simpson case. OJ spent a large amount of money on lawyers and other trained professionals to prove that he was innocent. On top of that, he persuaded the jury with his acting. He was supposed to try on the gloves, and he made it look like the gloves wouldn’t fit on his hands. Although OJ was not innocent, he got off free because of persuasion. To end, not only the wrongfully accused are affected, but also the immediate family is punished both physically and emotionally.
It affects the parents, wife, children, siblings, etc. Being sent to jail for life is almost like the death. This person is in prison for the rest of their life; you can rarely see them, talk to them, do the things you used to with them, etc. One has to adapt to these changes and they can be very tough to overcome. It is said that “there can be up to a 70% increase in death of the surviving spouse within the first six months” (Medicine Net). This goes to show how much added stress is upon members of the family. This person may go through stages of grief and mourning. A wrongful conviction has the power to destroy a family where there would be no destruction had the conviction been distributed correctly. If the prisoner is exonerated and had their name cleared, it is said that they will live a much tougher life then they had
before. Lastly, real life situations have occurred that legitimately prove the justice system is flawed. Initially, the case of David Milgaard proves one of the many mistakes that have been made in the criminal justice system. He was charged with the murder of Gail Miller in January 1970 and was sentenced to life in prison. Joyce Milgaard (his mother) believed that he was innocent from day one, so she did whatever she could to keep the case alive. He spent more than two decades in prison before Justice Minister Kim Campbell ordered the Supreme Court to review the conviction. In 1997 Milgaard was cleared by DNA evidence and was free from prison. In 1999 the Saskatchewan government awarded him ten million dollars for his wrongful conviction. Later that year, a man named Larry Fisher was found guilty of the rape and stabbing death of Gail Miller. An innocent man took someone else’s conviction for over two decades. Although he was awarded ten million dollars, no money will ever buy back the missed memories for the twenty years that he missed. Next, the case of Donald Marshall will prove that the people in the justice system can be unreliable. In 1971Donald Marshall (who was only seventeen) was accused of murdering his friend Sandy Seale in a Nova Scotia park. He served eleven years in prison before he was released after the RCMP reviewed his case. He was cleared and declared not guilty. He was told that he had contributed to his own conviction. Marshall was a Mi’kmaq, which is a type of first nations person who lives in Nova Scotia. There was systematic racism that contributed to his wrongful conviction. Many were in on it, police, judges, Marshall’s defence lawyers, Crown lawyers, etc. Rob Ebsary, was convicted of manslaughter in Seale’s death and only spent a year in jail. Marshall died in August 2009, he was only 55. He died at such a young age because of what he went through as a child; he spent most of his childhood in prison, which can permanently damage a human being. An innocent man went to jail for eleven years of his life all because of his background. Finally, the case of Steven Truscott will prove that misleading evidence can lead to a wrongful conviction. Truscott was sentenced to be hanged at the age of fourteen in 1959. He was on death-row for the murder and rape of Lynne Harper. Witnesses said they witnessed Truscott giving Harper a ride up by the highway (which was right beside the forest). Truscott witnessed her get into the car and they drove away. Then the same witness said they saw him ride back alone about 10 minutes later. Her body was found two days later not too far from where Truscott dropped her off. Thankfully his original death sentence was changed to life imprisonment. He was paroled in 1969, and he moved somewhere in southern Ontario. On August 28, 2007 (48 years later) the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned Truscott’s conviction and acquitted him. In July 2008, the Ontario government announce they would pay him 6.5 million dollars in compensation. This innocent man easily could have been hanged due to a lack of evidence. Although he was compensated all of that money, his life was drastically changed forever and he will never be able to take it back.
Throughout history many mistakes have been made and lives have been drastically changed as a result of these mistakes. By examining the burden of proof and its imperfections such as mistaken evidence, lack of evidence and improper police work. Secondly, by examining the effects of corruption, including loopholes in our legal system, the persuasion of jury by litigators and the family of the victim being directly affected. Thirdly by examining Canadian cases such as Truscott, Morin and Marshall, it will become evident that our justice system is imperfect and the wrongfully convicted deserve justice.
Works Cited
Boer, Peter. Wrongfully Convicted : the Innocent in Canada. Canada: Quagmire Press, 2007. Print. .
“Burden of Persuasion.” The Free Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 May 2011. .
CBC. “Canada’s Wrongful Convictions.” Cbcnews. N.p., n.d. Web. 13 May 2011. .
“DNA Evidence.” The Free Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 May 2011. .
Dryden-Edwards, Roxanne. “Gried: Loss of a Loved One.” MedicineNet. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 May 2011. .
“Exclusionary Rule.” The Free Dictionary. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 May 2011. .
Gardner, Thomas J, and Terry M Anderson. Criminal Evidence: Principles and Cases. New York: Wadsworth, 2009. Google Books. Web. 10 May 2011. .