The adequacy of China's responses to wrongful convictions

This paper examines a series of reforms that followed the discovery of high-profile wrongful convictions in China since 2005. There have been two waves of criminal justice reforms to prevent future wrongful convictions and to improve China's criminal justice system more generally. But it will be suggested in this paper that China's responses are inadequate because they allow traditional police and judicial practices that will lead to future wrongful convictions to continue. Further reforms will be suggested. First, police interrogations should be fully recorded, and the entire recording should be played back at trial. Second, the role of the defense counsel should be expanded. The use of state secrets as evidence against the accused should be curtailed. The close cooperation between the police, procuratorates and judiciary in the criminal justice should be counteracted by the creation of an independent body to review all serious convictions. Finally, the Chinese criminal justice has proven itself not safe enough to allow the broad use of capital punishment as a punishment for non-violent offences and at the very least, the immediate execution of prisoners who lose their final appeal must be abolished.     

当代英美刑法中的人格地位与人格评估

随着"报应模式"在当今英美刑法领域的衰微,犯罪人在英美刑法中的地位不断提高,刑法适用越来越重视人格.人格评估的方式在英美之间不尽相同,美国通过犯罪史进行评估,英国使用罪犯评估系统.     

No longer a civil matter? The design and use of protection orders for domestic violence in England and Wales

ABSTRACT

This paper assesses the design and use of protection orders for domestic violence in England and Wales. It draws on data from 400 police classified domestic violence incidents and 65 interviews with victims/survivors, as well as new analysis of government justice data from England and Wales, to address a gap in literature on protection orders.

The paper identifies an increasing civil-criminal ‘hybridisation’ of protection orders in England and Wales, and argues that a dual regime has developed, with orders issued by police and/or in criminal proceedings increasingly privileged (and enforced) over victim-led civil orders. Whilst protection orders are being used – as intended – flexibly to protect domestic violence victims, the way they are applied in practice risks downgrading domestic violence in criminal justice terms.

The conclusions are especially timely in light of current Government proposals to rationalise protection orders by introducing a single overarching Domestic Abuse Protection Order in England and Wales.     

The “quiet revolution” in criminal defence: how the zealous advocate slipped into the shadow

The criminal defence lawyer has been an integral component of adversarial criminal justice in England and Wales for nearly three centuries. However, over the last two decades this essential role has changed substantially, affected by a changing culture in the law and procedure governing criminal justice in this jurisdiction. This article argues that the criminal defence role has been pulled away from its traditional adversarial roots through a process of subtle and gradual change, pursued by the Government and the Judiciary. The article outlines a normative framework, entitled the ‘zealous advocate’ model, describing the ‘traditional’ role of the criminal defence lawyer; discusses ethical conflict and its growing significance; and examines how legislation, case law and funding have gradually moved the defence lawyer away from a ‘client-first’ style of representation. It concludes by considering the potentially significant implications of such a change in the role for both fair trial rights and adversarialism in England and Wales.     

Officials' Estimates of the Incidence of “Actual Innocence” Convictions

Evidence indicates that the conviction and imprisonment of factually innocent persons occur with some regularity. Most research focuses on causes, but the incidence of wrongful convictions is an important scientific and policy issue, especially as no official body gathers data on miscarriages of justice. Two methods are available for discovering the incidence of wrongful conviction: (1) enumerating specific cases and (2) having criminal justice experts estimate its incidence. Counts or catalogues of wrongful conviction necessarily undercount its incidence and are subject to accuracy challenges. We surveyed Michigan criminal justice officials, replicating a recent Ohio survey, to obtain an expert estimate of the incidence of wrongful conviction. All groups combined estimated that wrongful convictions occurred at a rate of less than ½ percent in their own jurisdiction and at a rate of 1–3 percent in the United States. Defense lawyers estimate higher rates of wrongful conviction than judges, who estimate higher rates than police officials and prosecutors. These differences may be explained by professional socialization. An overall wrongful conviction estimate of ½ percent extrapolates to about 5,000 wrongful felony convictions and the imprisonment of more than 2,000 innocent persons in the United States every year.     

Estimating wrongful convictions

Although numerous cases of wrongful convictions have been documented in the literature and in the media, criminologists have yet to devise a methodology for estimating the extent of such errors in the criminal justice system. I explore several methodologies with this purpose in mind, including the use of official data, inmates' self-reports, and case study approaches. Specifically, I use court-ordered discharges from imprisonment as a basis for measuring official error. In addition, I employ data from the RAND inmate surveys to estimate the extent of convicted offenders who deny their commitment offenses. Studies that attempt to catalogue individual wrongful convictions also serve as a basis for estimating false positive errors. Each methodology has its own limitations, but by employing multiple measures and approaches, I make possible an estimate of the “dark figure” of wrongful convictions.     

A Criminal Injustice System? Sex Offender Suspects and Defendants

The purpose of this paper is to open up a discussion regarding the potential shift from the presumption of innocence to a presumption of guilt regarding those suspected of or charged with sexual offending. It is acknowledged that further investigation is needed and it is hoped that this discussion is one of many. The crux of this paper therefore is that sex offender suspects and defendants potentially find themselves in a criminal injustice system. Whilst the focus is predominantly on ‘victims’ (usually female) and people suspected or charged with sexual offending (usually male) within the criminal justice system in England and Wales the concerns articulated here are not confined to this context. For example such concerns are echoed in relation to the potential injustices occurring on American campuses. This demonstrates that this is a domestic and international situation and a situation that extends beyond the criminal justice system. We argue that what is occurring at home and abroad has to be contextualised with regard to public, media and official attitudes and approaches to ‘victims’, suspects, defendants, sex, sexual consent, sexual offending and a subsequent shift from the presumption of innocence to a presumption of guilt. It is argued that not only is the presumption of innocence undermined by the presumption of guilt regarding suspects and defendants in cases of sexual offending, it is also undermined in England and Wales by the victim personal statement (VPS). The VPS contains and promotes the idea that there is a ‘victim’ and ‘offender’ before this has been legally established in a court of law. These assumptions embodied within the VPS weaken the principle and practice of the presumption of innocence. The safeguard of the presumption of innocence is potentially under threat and the result is an even greater potential for miscarriages of justice and wrongful convictions.     

Identifying Miscarriages of Justice: Why Innocence in the UK is Not the Answer

This article examines two contrasting proposals for the reform of criminal appeals: the government's recent proposal that the guilty should no longer have their convictions quashed on 'technicalities'; and calls by campaigners for the Court of Appeal to consider innocence rather than the 'safety of the conviction,' together with their associated attempts to establish Innocence Projects in the UK. Despite the rhetorical power of 'innocence' as a campaigning tool, it is contended that to import such a standard into the legal system would be retrogressive and counter-productive, both as a safeguard against wrongful convictions and in protecting the integrity of the system. In order to be meaningful, due process protections must apply to all. The government's proposals attack this principle directly; innocence campaigners risk unwittingly assisting their endeavours.     

Electronic Monitoring of Offenders

This article discusses what the electronic monitoring of offenders involves and the use that is now being made of electronic monitoring within the criminal justice system in England and Wales.     

Arresting Statistics: The Drift to Informal Justice in England and Wales

This paper re-examines some of the current theoretical models and paradigms of criminal justice in England and Wales based on an analysis of national arrest statistics between 1981 and 1997. The data show that there has been a large increase in the number of arrests in the period but the number of people prosecuted has declined. An increasing number of people are being arrested and released without any further action. The principal argument is that there has been a radical shift in power away from the formal open and public system of justice towards a more informal closed system. The paper concludes that while these trends lend support to a number of theoretical perspectives on the criminal justice process, particularly Choongh's social disciplinary model, the radical transformation which has taken place in the form of criminal justice can only be understood within the broader politics and economic structures of modern Britain.     

Discretion at the Pre-Trial Stage: A Comparative Study

This study aims to explore the discretion of the police and prosecutors during the pre-trial stage based on six systems of criminal justice: England and Wales, the United States, France, Germany, Japan, and South Korea. In criminal proceedings, discretion plays a significant role in supplementing as statutes cannot provide for every circumstance. In particular, at the pre-trial stage, public prosecutors can conclude their cases by exercising considerable discretion. Such discretion differs depending on the jurisdiction. The differences demonstrate distinctive prosecutorial roles. Based upon these findings, I propose that in general, the public prosecution service plays a filtering role. Unlike other jurisdictions, in Korea the prosecutors act as monopolists. However, justice cannot be achieved by the monopoly of one legal actor in the criminal proceedings.     

Miscarriages of Justice and the Government of the Criminal Justice System: An Alternative Perspective on the Production and Deployment of Counter-Discourse

This article confronts a perennial question raised by critical criminologists, namely, what part do critical counter-discourses play in the exercise of dominant forms of power in the sphere of criminal justice? In specific terms, it analyses some of the key sources of critical socio-legal counter-discourse that were produced and deployed in response to the most recent governmental review of the criminal justice system on the problem of miscarriages of justice in England and Wales. In so doing, it draws from Foucault’s theses on power, resistance and governmentality and suggests an alternative reading of the relations of power and the role and rationality of governmental intervention in the legislative framework of the criminal justice system. In light of this, it is argued that the reform of the criminal justice system should not only or merely be viewed as a ‘damage limitation exercise’ by a repressive state attempting to ‘betray’ the public to retain or reproduce its power. On the contrary, reform of the criminal justice system might, also, fruitfully be seen as part of a process that is initiated when the governmental conditions are right; a process which can, also, present opportunities to achieve progressive reforms.     

Exploring the relationship between sentencing and the legitimacy of trial justice

This paper argues that recent sustained criticism of judicial sentencing in England and Wales reflects a much deeper malaise afflicting the legitimacy of punishment in the late post-modern era. It suggests that this phenomenon not only threatens the liberal-consensus view of the judiciary as pivotal to the rule of law, but also undermines the rationality which underpins conventional paradigms of criminal justice more generally. The paper goes on to argue that there are important lessons to be learned from engaging with the debates about punishment and sentencing which are taking place on the international stage, suggesting that the crisis in domestic sentencing is really symptomatic of a more fundamental crisis in penal legitimacy affecting the whole of civil society; one that touches upon the role of punishment in the governance of so-called democratic states. The paper concludes that the time may have come to modify the predominant neo-liberal paradigm prevalent in western democracies by developing notions of punishment and sentencing as relational contexts which provide meaningful links between trial outcomes and aspirations for justice.     

刑事错案形成的心理原因

刑事错案的成因包括直接原因、环境原因和心理原因,其中心理原因(主要表现为包括"遂道视野"、"证实偏差"等在内的各种心理偏差)对错案的形成有更根本的影响。绝大多数直接原因,如刑讯逼供、隐瞒有利于犯罪嫌疑人、被告人的证据、忽视辩护律师的合理意见等等,都是各种心理偏差的外在表现。而绝大多数环境原因,如不合理的考核方式、司法经费不足等等,之所以会导致错案,主要是因为它们强化了这些心理偏差。根据这些心理偏差对错案形成的可能影响,可以在心理学层面总结出刑事错案的形成过程及规律,而我国近年来纠正的22起刑事错案可以为此提供验证。我国有必要完善当前的刑事司法体制,以减少这些心理偏差对办案人员的影响,进而更有效地防止错案的发生。     

错误的刑事羁押与国家的赔偿责任

刑事诉讼中的错误羁押与刑事错案常常相伴而生,但二者并非同一概念。错误羁押以刑事程序法为认定依据,即使没有错案发生,羁押行为违反《刑事诉讼法》的规定亦照样构成错误羁押。与错案相联系的错误羁押或合法羁押都应当导致刑事司法机关的国家赔偿责任,而未构成错案但构成错误羁押并因此导致当事人合法权益损害的,国家也应当有条件地承担赔偿责任。国家对无错案条件下错误羁押承担赔偿责任,有利于增强刑事司法机关的程序公正意识和人权保障意识,防止和减少羁押的滥用。     

Views from the Top and Bottom: Lawmakers and Practitioners Discuss Sex Offender Laws

The perceptions and attitudes that policymakers and criminal justice practitioners have about sexual offending and sexual victimization affects how state lawmakers respond to sex crimes, and how practitioners implement sex offender legislation. Policymakers continue to create new sex offender laws and, as such, the number of convicted sex offenders continues to rise. Thus, policymakers and criminal justice practitioners are increasingly important players in the public policy response to sexual criminals. To better understand the motivation, rationale, content, and purpose of statewide sex offender laws, and their role in the day-to-day management of convicted sex offenders, a non-probability sample of policymakers (n?=?61) and criminal justice practitioners (n?=?25) from across the country were interviewed. Results indicated that nearly all respondents from both groups were familiar/very familiar with their state-level sex offender laws. Policymakers and practitioners also mentioned the influential role that specific victimizations play in creating a perceived need for more sex offender legislation. The politicians and the practitioners view the laws as effective public safety mechanisms. Still, both groups noted serious problems with the laws. Furthermore, policymakers had a more negative attitude about the efficacy of sex offender therapy than criminal justice respondents. Suggestions for future research and policy implications are offered.     

Advancing Wrongful Conviction Scholarship: Toward New Conceptual Frameworks

As wrongful conviction scholarship grows, some scholars have suggested that existing research on miscarriages of justice lacks theoretical grounding and methodological sophistication, arguing that the use of social science theory may help to better understand wrongful convictions. In this article, we suggest that it may be useful to draw upon conceptual frameworks found in traditional criminal justice studies, discuss what such approaches might suggest about miscarriages of justice, and begin to explore the questions or topics they may encourage interested researchers to pursue. Furthermore, through this broad theoretical lens, we can see that criminal justice theory is present, at least implicitly, in some existing innocence literature, and that making such theoretical connections more explicit may help to move the study of wrongful conviction into the mainstream of criminal justice research.     

Sentencing Councils and Victims

This article explores the place victims have, and should have, in bodies that formulate sentencing guidelines, with particular reference to sentencing guidelines in England and Wales and the Sentencing Council's obligation under the Coroners and Justice Act 2009 to have regard to ‘the impact of sentencing decisions on victims of offences’ when devising guidelines. The issues are situated in political and penological contexts; the place of victims in sentencing commissions or advisory bodies in the USA, England and Australia is analysed and the meaning and significance of the Sentencing Council's obligation towards victims is considered, relating the specific obligation to broader issues concerning the place of victims within bodies that formulate sentencing guidelines. While incorporating victims within sentencing commissions might undermine commissions’ aims, it can play an important role in helping to boost public confidence in criminal justice, a touchstone for all western governments’ criminal justice policies.     

The use of neuroscientific evidence in the courtroom by those accused of criminal offenses in England and Wales

This examination of the extent of the use of neuroscientific evidence in England and Wales identifies 204 reported cases in which such evidence has been used by those accused of criminal offenses during the eight-year period from 2005–12. Based on the number of reported cases found, the use of such evidence appears well established with those accused of criminal offenses utilizing such evidence in approximately 1 per cent of cases in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). Neuroscientific evidence is used to quash convictions, to lead to convictions for lesser offenses and to lead to reduced sentences. In addition, cases are identified where neuroscientific evidence is used to avoid extradition, to challenge bail conditions and to resist prosecution appeals against unduly lenient sentences. The range of uses identified is wide: including challenging prosecution evidence as to the cause of death or injury, challenging the credibility of witnesses and arguing that those convicted were unfit to plead, lacked mens rea or were entitled to mental condition defenses. The acceptance of such evidence reflects the willingness of the courts in England and Wales to hear novel scientific argument, where it is valid and directly relevant to the issue(s) to be decided. Indeed, in some of the cases the courts expressed an expectation that structural brain scan evidence should have been presented to support the argument being made.     

Innocence Commissions: Due Process Remedies and Protection for the Innocent

Currently the American criminal justice system has no institutional mechanism to evaluate the conviction of an innocent person. An innocence commission would fill this gap. The commission would automatically review any acknowledged case of wrongful conviction, whether the conviction was reversed on post-conviction DNA tests, or through development of new evidence of innocence. Upon review of these cases, the commission would recommend remedies to prevent such miscarriages of justice from happening again. This paper commences with a review of the primary areas of wrongful conviction, followed by recommendations made with respect to the substantive components constituting innocence commissions. To empirically demonstrate the fiscal soundness of creating an innocence commission, data was gathered pertaining to the state of Arizona. Statements from criminal justice professionals and politicians in support of innocence commissions conclude our discussion.