Scientific evidence and investigation by the new Criminal Cases Review Commission: the scope for further miscarriages of justice and crisis

Abstract

This chapter examines changes in the current processes and institutions of criminal justice that are expected to restore public confidence in the safety of convictions: the increased use of scientific evidence, and the new Criminal Cases Review Commission. In the case of scientific evidence, the chapter seeks to show how its increased use at trial may actually exacerbate the difficulties faced by the Court of Appeal in seeking to demonstrate that miscarriages of justice are exceptional and unintended, rather than widespread and routine. In particular, the Court's deference to the verdict of the jury (the principal device used by the Court to justify its reluctance to embrace an open-ended system of reinvestigation and rehearing) comes under particular strain in appeals involving a reassessment of scientific evidence on appeal. While there are constitutional difficulties in asking the Home Office to investigate miscarriages of justice, the Court's reluctance to entertain appeals casts doubt on whether the Commission will be able to sustain a reputation for efficient rectification of miscarriages.