Model answer that was created and used by two A* students who both received 100% in the final Unit 3 exam. Detailed description of the validity of evidence, trial transcripts, media, judgements and law reports in relevant case studies.
*please note don’t copy exactly as it would be considered p...
Validity of evidence in the Sion Jenkins case:
Evidence is the physical or testimonial evidence given in a courtroom, juries use it when
deciding the verdict of the crime. Juries do take into account how valid the evidence is.
In the case of Sion Jenkins most of the evidence is invalid. One bit of evidence was the
microscopic drops of blood found in Sions clothing. Mr Wain and Mr Russell Stockdale, two
expert forensic scientists, both reached the same conclusion that the blood could have been
transferred by beating Billie. Therefore this piece of evidence has high levels of accuracy
and so holds high currency in the courtroom and with the jury. However this evidence may
be circumstantial as droplets may have been exhaled passively onto Sions clothing whilst he
was trying to help his daughter, this decreases the validity. Another piece of evidence is the
circumstances surrounding the murder and Sions behaviour this meant in the opinion of the
investigator Sion seemed suspicious. To begin with he took no money to the shop in order to
buy white spirit that was already in the garage, it was also revealed he had previously lied on
his CV. However this evidence may just be coincidences that are exaggerated by the police's
bias. Normally lying on your CV, and forgetting money for the shops is a common thing to do
but the police may have used this evidence to build on Sions bad character case therefore it
is a matter of the jury's opinion and the level of currency of the evidence is up to them.
Therefore these circumstances are opinionated and not fully accurate. Lastly the character
evidence given by Sion’s ex wife was considered to be invalid. As it was said that character
evidence given by an ex partner isn’t accurate due to bias caused by a negative opinion of
that individual. In all three trials the testimonial evidence given by her claiming Sion was
violent was deemed inadmissible due the lack of credibility and reliability, therefore the
accuracy was limited.
, Validity of evidence in the Stefan Kiszko case:
In the case of Stefan Kiszko it wasn’t until after the first trial where Stefan was found guilty
where it started to become obvious that the evidence was flawed and therefore invalid.
Confessions have high levels of currency and accuracy due to the defendant revealing they
are guilty. However the circumstances surrounding Stefans confession lowered the accuracy
and currency of it and meant that it was deemed invalid. This is because the police didn’t
provide Kiszko with a responsible adult and other support despite the fact he was classed as
a vulnerable victim due to him having a mental age of 7. Therefore the police exploited his
mental health problems in order to force him to confess this was due to their own bias
opinions that Stefan was the “ideal man” to have committed the murder. Therefore the
verdict wasn’t influenced by the confession as it wasn’t used as evidence. A physical piece
of evidence used to originally convict him was the semen samples found at the crime scene,
the police were biassed when first analysing the case and assumed the samples were his.
Semen samples can be tested by forensic experts and are unique to each person therefore
they are a valid source of DNA evidence, which have high levels of accuracy, increasing its
currency. However Stefan had a rare medical condition named hypogonadism, this meant he
had a stunted puberty and was infertile. The pathologist involved in the investigation found
active sperm traces on the victims clothes but when police took a sperm sample of Stefan no
traces of sperm were found, therefore the police's opinions were wrong. Consequently due
to the circumstances of the evidence it was deemed invalid and inaccurate. Lastly there was
another piece of testimonial evidence used to convict him of the murder, an eyewitness
testimony of 4 girls. Originally this was deemed as valid as eyewitness testimonies are highly
relied on and since there were 4 girls claiming they saw the same thing the evidence was
high in currency. The 4 girls claimed that Stefan exposed himself to them on the same day
as the murder. However after the first trial the girls admitted to lying because they thought it
was funny, this testimony led to his arrest. Therefore it became obvious that the evidence
wasn’t reliable or credible so lacked accuracy and became invalid.
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller erinhurst. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $4.70. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
