The Role of Storytelling in Criminal Justice System
SCHOOL OF HUMANITIES, LANGUAGES, AND SOCIAL SCIENCES
UNIVERSITY OF SALFORD
Constructing Guilt & Innocence
@00241489/Epm713
Chris Birkbeck
Assessment 1: Are criminal cases won or lost on the evidence, or on the stories that are told.
Word Count: 2500
The aim of this essay is to define the concepts of evidence and story telling by way answering the question of, are cases won or lost on the evidence or the stories told. To place the assignment in the correct context for the discussion, it will use illustrations from the cases discussed in lecture to describe the difference between actual criminal evidence and the stories inferred from them. Furthermore, to demonstrate how story telling and evidence may benefit or hinder the outcome of criminal cases.
The English legal system is an adversary system in which cases are presented before the court. There are two opposing sides the defense and the prosecution. Both sides have an equal and fair oppurtunity to argue their cases, before a neutral panel, which can also include a jury and a judge. The judge and jury are expected to remain impartial and are chosen in part using criteria that is designed to discard people who might have a bias in the case
In turn, both sides present the evidence and witnesses to support their positions. The opposing side is able cross examine witnesses, analyze the evidence independently, and challenge arguments made before the court. The jury’s role is to determine the facts of the case and if any action needs to be taken. Adversarial systems are widely criticized for encouraging a system where each side is competing against the other.
The definition of the concept of evidence given by Collin (2007) describes evidence as ‘ Facts that help to prove or disprove something at a trial’ (Collin, 2007). Collins (2007) definition refers to the facts, this gives a misunderstanding as to
UNIVERSITY OF SALFORD
Constructing Guilt & Innocence
@00241489/Epm713
Chris Birkbeck
Assessment 1: Are criminal cases won or lost on the evidence, or on the stories that are told.
Word Count: 2500
The aim of this essay is to define the concepts of evidence and story telling by way answering the question of, are cases won or lost on the evidence or the stories told. To place the assignment in the correct context for the discussion, it will use illustrations from the cases discussed in lecture to describe the difference between actual criminal evidence and the stories inferred from them. Furthermore, to demonstrate how story telling and evidence may benefit or hinder the outcome of criminal cases.
The English legal system is an adversary system in which cases are presented before the court. There are two opposing sides the defense and the prosecution. Both sides have an equal and fair oppurtunity to argue their cases, before a neutral panel, which can also include a jury and a judge. The judge and jury are expected to remain impartial and are chosen in part using criteria that is designed to discard people who might have a bias in the case
In turn, both sides present the evidence and witnesses to support their positions. The opposing side is able cross examine witnesses, analyze the evidence independently, and challenge arguments made before the court. The jury’s role is to determine the facts of the case and if any action needs to be taken. Adversarial systems are widely criticized for encouraging a system where each side is competing against the other.
The definition of the concept of evidence given by Collin (2007) describes evidence as ‘ Facts that help to prove or disprove something at a trial’ (Collin, 2007). Collins (2007) definition refers to the facts, this gives a misunderstanding as to
References: Bennett and Feldman (1981) page 78 – reconstructing reality in the court room, taylor & francis 1981 . Rutgers. Bex, F.J. Braak, S.W. van den, Oostendorp, H. van, Prakken, H., Verheij, B., and Vreeswijk, G. 2007. Sense– making software for crime investigation: how to combine stories and arguments? Law, Probability and Risk 6: 145 –168 Collin, P.H. (2007) Dictionary of Law. London: A. and C. Black. George F. James, Relevancy, Probability and the Law, 29 CALIF. L. REV. 689, 690 (1941) Griffin, L.K Kaplow l (2012), Burden of Proof, 121 YALE L.J. 738 (critiquing conventional thinking about the burden of proof according to probabilistic conceptions). Kenworthey Bilz, We Don’t Want To Hear It: Psychology, Literature and the Narrative Model of Judging, 2010 U. ILL. L. REV. 429, 435 Hails, J (2009) Criminal Evidence Jonathan Goodman (1986) The Moors Murders. The Trial of Myra Hindley and Ian Brady. Newton Abbot: David and Charles. Pages 166-168. Pennington, N. and Hastie, R. (1988) ‘Explanation-based Decision Making: Effects of Memory Structure on Judgment.’ Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 14(3):521-533. Pennington, N., and Hastie, R. 1993. Reasoning in explanation–based decision making. Cognition 49:1–2, 123– 163. Pdf file : date accessed febuary 14th 2013 Pennington and hastie 1991 Citation: 13 Cardozo L Upshur, R.E.G. (2001) ‘The status of qualitative research as evidence’. Ch. 1 in The Nature of Qualitative Evidence, edited by J. Morse, J. Swanson, and A. Kuzel. Thousand Oaks: Sage Verheij, B., and Bex, F.J Verheij, B. 2003. Dialectical Argumentation with Argumentation Schemes: An Approach to Legal Logic. Artificial Intelligence and Law 11 (1-2), pp. 167–195. Wagenaar, W.A., Koppen, P.J. van, and Crombag, H.F.M. (1993) Anchored Narratives: The Psychology of Criminal Evidence, St. Martin 's Press, New York (New York).