Justice itself is a complex concept, necessary for the functioning of most modern societies. It establishes a system that ensures individuals are treated impartially, fairly, and equally, upholds moral and legal principles, and establishes and protects the rights of those involved. The definition and interpretation of justice is highly dependent on culture, existing legal systems, and in some cases tradition and religion, however most justice systems are based on several key aspects including fairness and equality, rule of law, morality and ethics and human rights. (Soken-Huberty, 2022) Having a fair and just legal system is essential in the path of justice. A justice system must be fair in order to be credible. This protects individual rights
…show more content…
The Birmingham six were a group of Irish men (Patrick Joseph Hill, Hugh Callaghan, Richard McIlkenny, Gerard Hunter, William Power, and John Walker) wrongfully convicted for the bombing of pubs in Birmingham in 1974 that resulted in 21 deaths and around 180 injuries. The six were arrested, tried, and sentenced to life imprisonment for the crimes in 1975, though maintained their innocence throughout. (Malkani, 2013) The trial was marred by issues throughout, and despite concerns over the fairness of the trial, the six spent 16 years in prison before new evidence led to a re-examination of the case that eventually led to their release. It was the numerous judicial miscarriages and major flaws in legal proceedings that led to the wrongful conviction of the six. The case was severely lacking in forensic evidence to link the six to the pub bombings and the lack of this evidence raised questions as to the validity of the charges and the reliability of the investigation as a whole. Despite this, the six were convicted based on coerced confessions obtained through the horrific psychological and physical treatment the six claimed to have suffered at the hands of investigators. These confessions would later be proven to be unreliable and obtained under duress (Denis). Faul., 1976) The authorities responsible for investigating the case failed to thoroughly investigate the alibis provided by the six, which could have led to an earlier exoneration. This disregard of …show more content…
Statutes of limitation or procedural hurdles may impede the reopening of a case and the introduction of any new evidence. Strict rules may limit the opportunity for a post-conviction review, hindering the presentation of evidence that could prove innocence. Forensic evidence plays a crucial role in many trials; however, it may not be subjected to rigorous scrutiny during the initial trial. The re examination of forensic evidence can be challenging, particularly if methods used at the time are outdated or inaccurate, or if the evidence has not been well preserved, if at all. Access to evidence once a trial has concluded may be limited, restricted, or altogether denied. Obtaining new evidence may be impossible depending on the age of the crime, while re-examining existing evidence may present legal challenges that make it difficult to uncover facts that may be used to exonerate a convicted individual. Wrongfully convicted individuals, particularly those who lacked effective legal representation during their trial, may face challenges in securing competent legal assistance, post-conviction, which can limit their ability to present compelling evidence and arguments. There is societal expectation that court judgements are final, which can cause resistance when revisiting a case and hinder efforts to challenge and overturn a wrongful conviction. The
The Birmingham six were a group of Irish men (Patrick Joseph Hill, Hugh Callaghan, Richard McIlkenny, Gerard Hunter, William Power, and John Walker) wrongfully convicted for the bombing of pubs in Birmingham in 1974 that resulted in 21 deaths and around 180 injuries. The six were arrested, tried, and sentenced to life imprisonment for the crimes in 1975, though maintained their innocence throughout. (Malkani, 2013) The trial was marred by issues throughout, and despite concerns over the fairness of the trial, the six spent 16 years in prison before new evidence led to a re-examination of the case that eventually led to their release. It was the numerous judicial miscarriages and major flaws in legal proceedings that led to the wrongful conviction of the six. The case was severely lacking in forensic evidence to link the six to the pub bombings and the lack of this evidence raised questions as to the validity of the charges and the reliability of the investigation as a whole. Despite this, the six were convicted based on coerced confessions obtained through the horrific psychological and physical treatment the six claimed to have suffered at the hands of investigators. These confessions would later be proven to be unreliable and obtained under duress (Denis). Faul., 1976) The authorities responsible for investigating the case failed to thoroughly investigate the alibis provided by the six, which could have led to an earlier exoneration. This disregard of …show more content…
Statutes of limitation or procedural hurdles may impede the reopening of a case and the introduction of any new evidence. Strict rules may limit the opportunity for a post-conviction review, hindering the presentation of evidence that could prove innocence. Forensic evidence plays a crucial role in many trials; however, it may not be subjected to rigorous scrutiny during the initial trial. The re examination of forensic evidence can be challenging, particularly if methods used at the time are outdated or inaccurate, or if the evidence has not been well preserved, if at all. Access to evidence once a trial has concluded may be limited, restricted, or altogether denied. Obtaining new evidence may be impossible depending on the age of the crime, while re-examining existing evidence may present legal challenges that make it difficult to uncover facts that may be used to exonerate a convicted individual. Wrongfully convicted individuals, particularly those who lacked effective legal representation during their trial, may face challenges in securing competent legal assistance, post-conviction, which can limit their ability to present compelling evidence and arguments. There is societal expectation that court judgements are final, which can cause resistance when revisiting a case and hinder efforts to challenge and overturn a wrongful conviction. The