NCJ Number
225385
Date Published
2008
Length
29 pages
Annotation
This chapter argues that although extensive safeguards exist to prevent the conviction of the innocent in England and Wales, errors nonetheless occur, and examines the nature of “residual error” in England and Wales, the mechanisms put in place to respond to such residual error, and the performance of those mechanisms in recent years.
Abstract
The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is a definite improvement on previous mechanisms for remedying residual error, and has on the whole been well received. However, criticism is growing with continued dissatisfaction with delays, and a perceived low referral rate. In addition, there is an emergent agenda concerning the state of the compensation of the wrongfully imprisoned and abused. Yet, it is thought that criminal justice systems should be judged on the number of injustices produced by them first, and second, on their willingness to recognize and correct those mistakes. It is thought that the British system could improve on both counts. The questions addressed in this chapter are how far should a criminal justice system be alert to these possibilities of error, and how should it respond. The chapter first considers a definition and typology of miscarriages of justice and then the mechanisms in place to respond to residual error and their performance, specific to England and Wales. Notes