Outline: The Case Of Bradley John Murdoch

The court could have taken into account that there was no physical evidence that linked him to the crime. There was also express evedence against other parties that where involved. CASE #2: Lavelle Burt, 1986 Briefly outline the case (paste the link to it here as well).

This represented the power and position of forensic pathology in the criminal justice system, which the Crown and defence rely on, but can end in incarcerations of innocent individuals, as shown in John’s case. In this investigation, rather than having evidence presented by a forensic pathologist, Dr. Dietrich was a clinical pathologist who was trained to determine causes of disease in living patients and not to perform post-mortem examinations to identify the causes of death. John’s trial was proceeded by an unqualified pathologist without training in the area required to provide medical evidence in criminal trials, which lead to misdiagnoses and John’s wrongful conviction. As well, rather than approaching evidence with an open mind “without preconceptions or presumptions about abuse”, Dr. Dietrich had initially believed Maxine’s death was a homicide, therefore demonstrating his bias and lean towards evidence supporting his view instead of the truthful information

Lack of physical evidence: Overall in this case there was a lack of physical presented. There were no conclusive DNA results in the case. There was no weapon recovered. The majority of the evidence presented in this case was circumstantial evidence produce by witness testimony.

If Lizzie faced a fair trial, the court room lacked one two things: a seemingly unbiased media presence and

 Case Assessment  Click on the link below to view my case assessment in Word Format  Personal View :)  I believe that Lindy was innocent from the start. If proper forensic tests were performed then the jury probably would of arrived at this decision as well.

In fact, much of the court case is based on onlookers who barely saw any of the incident. Much of what was said was falsified. “Questions were asked of the incident. Lies were given as answers (page 144).” The verdict was decided based on the untruths, and Madam got to choose a punishment for

Due to the high levels of publicity that surrounded this case, it was nearly impossible for the court to find a completely impartial and oblivious jury. Everyone in the surrounding area had knowledge of the atrocious way that these murders took place and many already strongly disliked Mr. Rolling. Police officers

They also found that Kercher's DNA had not been present on the knife found at Soleccito's flat.(Amanda Knox 2). This proof implies that Knox and Sollecito cannot be guilty unless further investigation proves the previous claim wrong. There were many controversial evidences that turned out to be supporting that Knox is not guilty. The knife that was the supposed "murder weapon" had no blood on it, it didn't match any of the wounds made on Meredith's body, and the knife couldn't have made the bloody imprint that was on the bed. Forensic Scientists never stated that the luminal indicated that it was blood, nor was there any blood found in the apartment that connected the two to the murder, therefore this is also an unreliable source to use for the

In order to make its case, the prosecution relied on erroneous forensic science and flawed expert witness testimony. In 1982 the initial trial, based almost exclusively on expert witness testimony, resulted in the baby’s mother, Lindy Chamberlain, being convicted of murder while the father, Michael Chamberlain, was found guilty

The 1954 trial of the murder of Marilyn Sheppard was one of the most well-known trial cases in U.S. at that time. It was the case of the media. The media was the thing that held the power. Along with prejudgments and hidden evidence, this was one of the most unprofessional held cases ever. No one person knows what actually happened that no one ever will know.

As with any criminal case, there are always a number of issues pertaining the stages of the crime and also the media and the general public’s opinion of the case. Many of the issues and explicit actions of certain individuals that had happened during the Corryn Rayney case had affected the interpretation of the case in someway for both government workers and the general public. By analysing the issues of the case, it allows a much more detailed view on the case and how most of the issues are linked in one way or another. One of the issues regarding this case was where a police officer had been found attempting to pressure forensic pathologists to alter their case reports to align with their best interests.

As police investigators showed up, they were not even the first ones there, reporters had beat them to it, trying to get as much information as they could. This trial even ended up being the longest one to that date, starting on July 24 and ending almost 10 months later. “As time went on, and the trial began, the amount of reporters and newsmen grew larger and larger. Even during the jury selection, news reporters were all lined up outside, and even filling the hallways, just so they could hear the trial. They knew that if they got the best information and could put together this story, it would be a great read, since this case was very popular and the whole country soon seemed to find out about it.

(1997). Regulating police discretion: An assessment of the impact of the NSW Young Offenders Act 1997. Criminal Law Journal, 28(2), pp.72-92. Retrieved from Westlaw. Code Of Conduct And Ethics (n.d.).

Additionally, the media got into the investigation by asking questions about the events before the murder. The National Enquirer, for instance, took a different angle to investigate the case; however, by doing this, the media almost made it impossible for proper investigations to be held by the criminal justice system. Ogletree Jr. maintains that the press failed terribly by trying to assume what the lawyers or witnesses thought at different times of the trial, which was a fail (Ogletree). Consequently, there should be a level of protection from the media. Public figures should not have their cases aired or followed to prevent tampering of evidence or misconceptions.

No medical evidence was ever collected or shown to prove that the crime ever took place. On the night after the assault, Mayella Ewell was never seen be a doctor. She was never examined to prove that Tom Robinson did anything to her. Mayella stated that she was beaten that night, so she should have gone to the doctor to get checked out. There is no proof of any crime, so there should not have been a guilty verdict.