Criminal Justice

In Uncategorized on October 5, 2011 by grahamharrowell

Once again the media (and a lawyer or two) continue the old line that since Amanda Knox has had her conviction overturned that somehow we don’t know who killed Meredith Kercher and that the police should be looking for someone else. Just because you are acquitted of an offence doesn’t mean you didn’t do it. The civilized system of justice we have requires the prosecution to present case which proves, beyond reasonable doubt, that someone’s actions satisfied the requirements set out in law for the accused to be convicted. If the evidence is not sufficient or (as it appears in this case) not properly preserved, if the prosecutor doesn’t impress the judge and the jury, if the defence persuades them that there is reasonable doubt then the defendant should and must be acquitted. That doesn’t mean that the defendant didn’t carry out the acts of which he or she stands accused and there have been cases where those acquitted at the criminal standard have been held responsible in a case at the lower civil standard. OK, you can have every right to say you’re innocent, but that doesn’t mean you didn’t do it. The need to try to ensure that the innocent aren’t convicted (which nonetheless still happens) must outweigh other considerations. What if the Italian SOCO had just remembered to change gloves when taking the DNA samples?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: