Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 11:05 pm
Time: 11:05 pm
Results for witnesses
19 results foundAuthor: Great Britain. HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, HM Inspectorate of Court Administration, and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary Title: Report of a Joint Thematic Review of Victim and Witness Experiences in the Criminal Justice System Summary: This joint inspectorate report examined the effectiveness of services provided to victims and witnesses of crime, and whether they maximized the likelihood of witnesses attending court and improved the confidence of victims and witnesses in the criminal justice system. Details: London: Criminal Justice Joint Inspection, 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 116247 Keywords: Criminal Justice SystemsVictimsWitnesses |
Author: Great Britain. Metropolitan Police Authority Title: Seen and Heard - Young People, Policing and Crime: An MPA Report Summary: The Metropolitan Policing Authority Youth Scrutiny was conducted between September 2007 and May 2008. The focus of this youth scrutiny was the causes, effects and impact of young people's involvement in crime as victims, witnesses and perpetrators and how this influence their interactions and relationships with the Metropolitan Police Service and other service providers who have a mandate to support and protect them. Details: London: 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 116246 Keywords: Juvenile OffendersJuvenilesPolice-Community RelationsWitnesses |
Author: United States Department of Justice. Office of the Community Oriented Policing Services Title: The Stop Snitching Phenomenon: Breaking the Code of Silence Summary: In order to ascertain the "stop snitching" phenomenon and how it is affecting important issues such as witness cooperation, clearance rates, and police departments' overall ability to bring criminals to justice, the Police Executive Research Forum (PERF) undertook this project with support by the Office of Community Oriented Policing Services to survey 300 law enforcement agencies and to gather together more that 100 criminal justice officials and community leaders to discover what is driving the stop snitching movement. The intent was to use that knowledge to develop programs and partnerships to address the issue. This report includes case studies documenting successful law enforcement and community approaches that have been implemented. Details: Washington, DC: 2009 Source: Year: 2009 Country: United States URL: Shelf Number: 115205 Keywords: Police Community RelationsWitnesses |
Author: Mahony, Chris Title: The Justice Sector Afterthought: Witness Protection in Africa Summary: This report seeks to address the frictions between protecting the rights of accused persons and protecting the physical and psychological wellbeing of witnesses in Africa. Developed states are still attempting to refine the weighing of these two public goods. The African challenge is complicated by poor capacity and integrity in the justice sector, as well as by lower living standards. These issues commonly cause justice inefficiencies which impede both witness protection and the rights of the accused. While the latter are critical to the integrity of the criminal justice process, witness protection is often the essential component of the successful prosecution of organised crime. Witness protection`s importance is tied to African states` growing willingness to address the phenomena of organised crime. The report addresses witness protection in South Africa as well as initiatives to create protection programmes in Kenya, Uganda and Sierra Leone. It also examines witness protection at the International Criminal Court (ICC), the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) and the Special Court for Sierra Leone (SCSL). Its interpretation of witness protection is wide and includes sensitive investigatory, prosecutorial and judicial practices as well as relocation and identity change. Details: Pretoria, South Africa: Institute for Security Studies, 2010. 230p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: South Africa URL: Shelf Number: 118704 Keywords: CourtsWitness ProtectionWitnesses |
Author: Payne, Sara Title: Redefining Justice: Addressing the Individual Needs of Victims and Witnesses Summary: 'Redefining Justice’ reports on the findings of a nine-month study of services currently provided to victims and witnesses of crime in the U.K., based on meetings with around 1,000 people including victims, witnesses and staff in organisations that support them. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2009. 49p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2009 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 117351 Keywords: Victim ServicesWitnesses |
Author: McLeod, Rosie Title: Court Experience of Adults With Mental Disabilities and Limited Mental Capacity Summary: In-depth interviews were conducted with people with mental health conditions, learning disabilities and limited mental capacity, who had been victims or witnesses in criminal proceedings, or parties in civil or family law cases. Carers, court staff and other key stakeholders also took part. The report is published in six volumes: 1) Overview and recommendations; 2) Before court; 3) At court; 4) After court; 5)Policy processes, services and practices; and 6)Technical report. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2010. 6 vols. Source: Internet Resource: Ministry of Justice Research Series 8/10: Accessed August 19, 2010 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/court-experiences-adults-mental-health.htm Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/publications/court-experiences-adults-mental-health.htm Shelf Number: 118807 Keywords: Criminal Courts (U.K.)Learning DisabilitiesMentally IllVictims of CrimeWitnesses |
Author: Wells, Gary L. Title: A Test of the Simultaneous vs. Sequential Lineup Methods: An Initial Report of the AJS National Eyewitness Identification Field Studies Summary: The significant role that mistaken eyewitness identifications have played in convictions of the innocent has led to a strong interest in finding ways to reduce eyewitness identification errors. Psychological scientists have been conducting laboratory studies on this problem for over 30 years and have proposed a number of possible reforms to the procedures used in conducting lineups. Most of the proposed reforms, including the critical requirement of double-blind administration (the administrator does not know the identity of the suspect), have not been considered controversial in principle and many jurisdictions across the United States have adopted them. The use of a double-blind (DB) sequential rather than a DB simultaneous lineup procedure, however, has engendered controversy, a controversy that has unnecessarily held back the adoption of non-controversial reforms in many jurisdictions. The sequential lineup shows lineup members to the witness one at a time and asks the witness to make a decision on each one before showing the next one, whereas the traditional simultaneous lineup shows the witness all lineup members at once. Controlled laboratory experiments consistently show that the DB sequential procedure results in a substantial reduction of mistaken identifications and a much smaller reduction in accurate identifications. Overall, the DB sequential lineup produces a better ratio of accurate identifications to mistaken identifications than the DB simultaneous procedure. Nevertheless, in May of 2006, a highly publicized field study in Illinois, directed by the Chicago Police Department not only called into question the sequential/simultaneous laboratory findings but raised concerns as to whether eyewitnesses in controlled experiments were a good approximation for actual eyewitnesses to serious crimes, a large share of which are victim-witnesses. Specifically, the Illinois study showed that the status quo method produced higher suspect identification rates and lower filler picks than did DB sequential lineups in two of the three cities that were tested. Lineup fillers are not suspects but instead are in the lineup to “fill it out” and create a fair procedure for the suspect. In a field experiment, the identification of fillers is the only witness response that can be definitively classified as an error. The Illinois study was quickly rejected by scientists for several reasons. Principal among the reasons were (a) that this field study confounded the simultaneous/sequential variable with non-blind versus double-blind testing, (b) there was no random assignment of cases to lineup procedure and later evidence from the Evanston site indicated that the “tougher” cases (e.g., cross-race, longer delay from crime to lineup) were more likely to be assigned to the sequential than to the simultaneous procedure, and (c) some unknown number of filler identifications were not recorded for the simultaneous lineups. Consequently, in September of 2006, the American Judicature Society convened a gathering of eyewitness scientists, lawyers, prosecutors, and police in Greensboro, NC, who developed what has become known as the “Greensboro Protocol.” The Greensboro Protocol was a set of guidelines for how to conduct a field experiment to test the simultaneous versus sequential issue and gather as much reliable data as possible on witness and event variables (e.g., type of crime, presence of a weapon, cross-race event, viewing conditions, previous acquaintance with the culprit, sobriety of the witness), and the actual administration of the lineup itself (e.g., time between crime and lineup, quality of lineup, the witness’s responses and statement of certainty). There was general agreement that the field study should feature a direct comparison of DB sequential and DB simultaneous procedures, true random assignment (the “gold standard” in scientific experiments), and the use of laptop computers. The use of laptop computers for administering the lineup and recording the witnesses responses was believed to be an especially important tool for conducting eyewitness field experiments because it could: 1) Ensure procedures were administered according to protocol (e.g., voice and printed pre-lineup instructions presented in every instance in a uniform fashion); 2) Reliably record all responses of the witness (e.g., no selectivity in deciding whether to make a record of a filler identification or lack of an identification); 3) Permit all the photos in a lineup to be preserved as part of the electronic record and reviewed subsequently by judges, juries, and scientists; 4) Randomly assign witnesses to conditions (e.g., whether a sequential or simultaneous procedure would be used); 5) Randomly determine order of the photos within each lineup; 6) Precisely record how long it took a witness to make an identification; 7) Require police officers to record systematically witness and event variables before the identification procedure was conducted; 8) Facilitate secure and contemporaneous recording of eyewitness data into the electronic information platforms of police departments; and 9) Enhance the confidence of prosecutors, judges, juries, and defense counsel that the eyewitness procedures were conducted fairly and in accordance with best practices. In short, there was an expectation that the design of this field study and the use of the laptop computers could produce a data set of unprecedented depth and detail beyond the sequential/simultaneous question. Details: Des Moines, IA: American Judicature Society, 2011. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed September 24, 2011 at: http://www.ajs.org/wc/pdfs/EWID_PrintFriendly.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ajs.org/wc/pdfs/EWID_PrintFriendly.pdf Shelf Number: 122890 Keywords: Criminal EvidenceEyewitness IdentificationPolice LineupsWitnesses |
Author: Great Britain. Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses in England and Wales Title: Victims’ Views of Court and Sentencing Qualitative research with WAVES victims Summary: This report is based on research exploring victims’ qualitative experiences of the Criminal Justice System (CJS) for crimes reaching court and resulting in a sentence. The research was conducted between January and March 2011, at the time the Government was consulting on its recently launched Green Paper Breaking the Cycle: Effective Punishment, Rehabilitation and Sentencing of Offenders. The Green Paper contained proposals of direct relevance to victims of crime and, therefore, it was an opportune time to consider the detailed experiences of victims and their receptiveness to changes that might affect them. Over the last ten years, there has been much talk about placing victims closer to the heart of the CJS, and ‘rebalancing’ the system in their favour. Yet, in this time, there has not been a concomitant amount of research relating to the victim experience of the CJS process, attendance at court, or what the outcome and sentence means for individual victims. The most significant survey in recent times on victims’ experiences of the CJS in post‐charge cases has been the Witness and Victim Experience Survey (WAVES). WAVES was a large‐scale quantitative survey with a focus on measuring levels of victim and witness satisfaction with the CJS, gauging the type of contact they experienced, as well as the provision of information, services, and support. However, WAVES has not provided more detailed qualitative information about victims’ views of their experience. This research seeks to help address this by, for example, exploring why victims were satisfied or dissatisfied, and what their detailed reaction was to the sentence passed in their case. This research looks at victims’ relationship with the CJS process, their views on the sentencing and how these factors affected them. It also considers aspects of the system where victims have the potential to be most closely involved, namely as a recipient of reparation (through financial compensation), through the opportunity to have a voice in the process (through a victim personal statement), and communicate directly with the offender (through restorative justice). Details: London: Commissioner for Victims and Witnesses in England and Wales, 2011. 32p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed October 25, 2011 at: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/news/press-releases/victims-com/victims-views-court-sentencing1011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/news/press-releases/victims-com/victims-views-court-sentencing1011.pdf Shelf Number: 123142 Keywords: Victims of Crimes (U.K.)Witnesses |
Author: Northern Ireland. Criminal Justice Inspection Title: The Care and Treatment of Victims and Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System in Northern Ireland Summary: The criminal justice system has a responsibility to ensure victims and witnesses feel safe, are supported and are consequently able to give evidence. Victims and witnesses also have a right to expect a straightforward and co-ordinated service from the criminal justice agencies. They are often the primary or sole witness of an offence, and they merit vigilant attention by all those involved in the criminal justice process. In addition, the needs of families of victims also have to be taken into consideration. Victims of some serious crime, and their families, are often subject to very traumatic events which change the course of their lives forever. It is important that the criminal justice system treats them sensitively and that their needs are taken into consideration in the design and delivery of justice services. Furthermore, the requirements of victims are often complex and need effective integration between not only the justice system, but other Government departments, such as health and the voluntary and community sector (VCS). The aim of this inspection report was to ensure that effective mechanisms were in place to increase the confidence of victims and witnesses so that they would fully participate within the criminal justice system in Northern Ireland. The inspection considered the experiences of victims and witnesses, as well as interagency working and governance arrangements for victims and witnesses services at a strategic level. It is axiomatic that if fitting services are provided by the criminal justice system, together with links to support systems from the voluntary sector, then more people may voluntarily come forward to report crime and give evidence in court. Individuals and their families will also be able to access appropriate services at the right time. This report is the third inspection into the experiences of victims and witnesses conducted by CJI since 2005. In terms of progress, Inspectors can report that of the 37 recommendations made by CJI in its 2005 report only two (5%) remain outstanding in their totality. This is a creditable performance and represents much good work and effort on the part of the criminal justice agencies and others. Details: Belfast: Northern Ireland Criminal Justice Inspection, 2011. 110p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 13, 2012 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/ba/ba2a6e4b-0e39-4e1f-af17-c6165a7c827f.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/ba/ba2a6e4b-0e39-4e1f-af17-c6165a7c827f.pdf Shelf Number: 123611 Keywords: Victim ServicesVictims of Crime, Services for (Northern Ireland)Witnesses |
Author: Orr, Skellington Kate Title: Summary Justice Reform: Victims, Witnesses and Public Perceptions Evaluation Summary: There was mixed awareness and understanding of the summary justice reforms. While professionals had some awareness, members of the public and victims and lay witnesses knew little of the reforms or the Scottish summary criminal system overall. When explained, most of the reforms were viewed positively by professionals and members of the public alike, and there was general agreement that the changes were a move in the right direction. There remained some scepticism about whether some of the specific reforms would meet the desired outcomes over time. Though not the aim of the summary justice reforms, better communication about what is required of victims and witnesses involved in the system may be needed and, for victims, overall experiences seem to be heavily determined by having case progress and case outcome information. For members of the public, confidence in the system is driven by proportionate sentencing and fair treatment of victims and witnesses. Details: Edinburgh, Scotland: Scottish Government Social Research, 2012. 85p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 3, 2012 at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00386764.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00386764.pdf Shelf Number: 123954 Keywords: Criminal Justice Reform (Scotland)Evaluative StudiesPublic OpinionsVictims of CrimeWitnesses |
Author: Franklyn, Ramona Title: Satisfaction and willingness to engage with the Criminal Justice System - Findings from the Witness and Victim Experience Survey, 2009-10 Summary: Ensuring that victims and witnesses are supported to participate in the Criminal Justice System (CJS) and are satisfied with their contact with the CJS is important for the delivery of justice. This report examines the experiences and perceptions of victims and witnesses involved in cases of violence against the person, robbery, burglary, criminal damage and theft and handling stolen goods in which someone was charged. It provides an overview of their experiences, before examining the factors most strongly associated with victim and witness satisfaction and their willingness to engage with the CJS again in future. The findings are based on analyses of the Witness and Victim Experience Survey (WAVES), a large-scale survey of such victims and witnesses, undertaken in England and Wales. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 116p. Source: Ministry of Justice Research Series 1/12: Internet Resource: Accessed February 21, 2012 at http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/satisfaction-willingness-to-engage-with-cjs.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/research-and-analysis/moj-research/satisfaction-willingness-to-engage-with-cjs.pdf Shelf Number: 124213 Keywords: Police-Community RelationsPublic OpinionVictimization SurveysVictims of Crime (U.K.)Witnesses |
Author: Orr, Kate Skellington Title: Perceptions of Summary Criminal Justice in Scotland Summary: In July and August 2011, three deliberative research workshops were held with members of the public in Scotland: one each in Ayr, Livingston and Aberdeen. This was part of a wider evaluation to explore the impact of Summary Justice Reforms (SJR) on victims and witnesses, as well as to gauge public perceptions of the summary justice system, and the reforms overall. This report focuses specifically on participant’s understanding, perceptions and expectations of the Summary Criminal Justice System in Scotland; how people view justice per se; and what could be done to improve or maximise public confidence in the system. The research found that there was limited and often inaccurate knowledge of the criminal justice system in Scotland among participants in this research. Participants did, however, want to know more about the system and there was a desire for fewer barriers to information, including the removal of jargon in the system, to make it more accessible. Participants wanted to see greater respect for victims and witnesses in the system, including better treatment at court and the receipt of case progress information at all stages of the justice process. The public court experience was perceived to be intimidating and not easy to understand, and this was compounded by perceptions that professionals working within the court system (including defence and prosecution agents) were unsympathetic to how daunting the experience may be for members of the public. Participants perceived the current system to treat the accused better than victims and witnesses, and believed that the court and prison system was not taken seriously by some offenders. Views on sentencing were complex. Community sentences and community payback were generally well supported by all participants as a means of delivering ‘visible justice’, which directly benefited those affected by the crimes. Views on custodial sentences were more varied with views expressed that while prison sentences needed to be imposed in a fair and consistent manner, they also needed to be sufficiently tough that offenders would be deterred from committing further crimes. Restoring and improving social values of respect for justice and authority overall was seen as a key underlying challenge to improving public confidence in the future. There was no suggestion, however, that responsibility for this should necessarily sit with the justice system. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research, 2012. 55p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed November 26, 2012 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0040/00405883.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0040/00405883.pdf Shelf Number: 127004 Keywords: CourtsCriminal Justice SystemPublic OpinionSentencingSummary Criminal Justice (Scotland)Victims of CrimesWitnesses |
Author: Warnken, Heather Title: Violence Against Women Needs Assessment Program Summary: Under California law, victims and witnesses of crime are granted certain statutory and constitutional rights, including that they be treated with dignity and respect. In 1982, California established itself as a national leader in the rights of crime victims in passing the Victim’s Bill of Rights. As a key component of these protections, Victim/Witness Assistance Centers (VWACs) arose in 1983 in an effort by the Legislature to reduce the trauma and insensitive treatment that victims and witnesses experienced in the criminal justice system. Today, state and federally funded VWACs operate in each of the 58 counties and in the City of Los Angeles and play a vital role in California’s criminal justice system. Despite the large numbers VWACs, however, very little research has been done to date on the work of California’s VWACs or of government provided victim/witness advocates in general. In particular, very little has been done on their work with one of the most vulnerable populations of crime victims: women victims of violence. Reports about government-based and community-provided Violence Against Women (VAW) victim services tend to fall into two general categories: reports that describe government provided services to all crime victims, with VAW victims as just one category of victim; and reports that focus on combating VAW with services mentioned only as one step to be taken by government. The California Emergency Management Agency (Cal EMA) funded a needs-assessment study of VWACs to be carried out by the California Crime Victims Assistance Association (CCVAA), in partnership with the California District Attorneys Association (CDAA). As part of this assessment, in 2011, the Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy, at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law, conducted a two-part survey including follow-up interviews with all 59 of the VWACs. The following questions formed the basis to this assessment: 1. Numbers of VAW victims served by VWACs for the past three to five years; 2. Demographics of VAW victims served by VWACs; 3. Types and numbers of services provided to VAW victims by VWACs; 4. Identification of VWAC prevention-related services provided to VAW victims; 5. Marsy’s Rights information and procedures provided to VAW victims; 6. Collaborations and referrals between VWACs and rape crisis centers and women shelters; 7. Descriptions of “best practices” with VAW victims used by VWACs; 8. Description of the current organizational capacity of the CCVAA (representing the statewide network of VWACs) to adequately meet the gaps in service needs of VAW victims served by VWAC; 9. Identification of other resources (potential funding sources) that would be necessary to build the capacity of the CCVAA to meet the needs of VAW victims served by VWAC. This report, based on the Warren Institute’s data collection, is the first comprehensive study ever done in California of the work and services that VWACs provide to women victims of violence. It represents VWACs’ perceptions of the importance of their work with VAW victims, the gaps in this work, and their needs for further expanding their services to victims of VAW crimes. It addresses all questions above for which VWACs had data. With these findings, Cal EMA, CCVAA, allied victim service organizations, and policy makers will be better equipped to make informed decisions regarding VWAC program development, resource allocation, advocate training, and organizational capacity-building benefitting VAW victims. Details: Berkeley, CA: California Crime Victims Association; California District Attorneys Association; University of California, Berkeley School of Law, Chief Justice Earl Warren Institute on Law and Social Policy, 2012. 70p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed January 24, 2013 at: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/bccj/VAW_Study-FINAL.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: http://www.law.berkeley.edu/files/bccj/VAW_Study-FINAL.pdf Shelf Number: 127381 Keywords: Abused WivesCrime VictimsDomestic ViolenceVictim ServicesVictims of Domestic ViolenceViolence Against Women (California)Witnesses |
Author: Granville, Sue Title: Making Justice Work for Victims and Witnesses Summary: The Scottish Strategy for Victims was published in 2001 and set out an action plan based on three core principles; that victims should be provided with generic and case specific information; that they should receive appropriate support; and that they should have their voice heard. Subsequently in 2005 the National Standards for Victims of Crime set out the level of service that victims and witnesses should expect in their dealings with the criminal justice and children’s hearing systems. Much of the work on witnesses in recent years has focused on implementing the Vulnerable Witnesses (Scotland) Act 2004, phased in between 2005 and 2008; and providing greater focus on the needs of witnesses when giving evidence. The Scottish Government is planning to introduce a Victims and Witnesses Bill, to improve the support available to victims and witnesses and in May 2012 issued a consultation to obtain views on a number of proposals to improve the experience of such individuals. The consultation contained 54 questions in relation to a number of key proposals: • Introducing a victim surcharge so that offenders pay towards the cost of supporting victims; • Requiring the courts to consider compensation in every case where a victim has suffered injury, loss or distress; • Creating a duty on relevant public agencies to set clear standards of service for victims and witnesses; • Creating an automatic right to special measures for victims in cases involving sexual offences and domestic abuse; • Commissioning a feasibility study into how the SG can provide much better information for victims and the public about specific cases; • Improving the way cases are managed so that victims and witnesses can have far greater confidence that, where they are required to give evidence, the case will go ahead on the day as planned; • Victims should be able to make oral representations to a member of the Parole Board so that they can contribute effectively to decisions about parole for criminals subject to life sentences. Details: Edinburgh: Scottish Government Social Research, 2012. 108p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 5, 2013 at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00412912.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0041/00412912.pdf Shelf Number: 127479 Keywords: Victim CompensationVictims of Crime (Scotland)Victims ServicesWitnesses |
Author: Northern Ireland Criminal Justice Inspection Title: The care and treatment of victims and witnesses in the criminal justice system in Northern Ireland, incorporating the use of special measures: A follow-up review of inspection recommendations Summary: Supporting victims and witnesses, and treating them as central to the delivery of criminal justice, has been a key political and moral objective for many years. Unfortunately in the past the rhetoric had continually fallen short of the citizens' reality as they engaged as victims and witnesses with the criminal justice system. Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland (CJI) has rightly continued to focus on this critical issue and produced a series of reports highlighting the deficits in effective service delivery and the need for greater partnership working to secure improvements. Since devolution, the political support for raising the status of victims and witnesses has injected real dynamism into the criminal justice agencies as they moved the subject further up their organisational agendas and together with the Department of Justice (DoJ), began to develop a more effective partnership approach to tackling the deficits. This follow-up review charts the very good progress made by the criminal justice agencies in response to our 2011 report 'The care and treatment of victims and witnesses in the criminal justice system in Northern Ireland' and 2012 publication 'The use of special measures in the criminal justice system in Northern Ireland'. Delivering the achievement of 96% against recommendations is a testament to the efforts of those who are striving to transform the experience of the victims and witnesses who are the mainstay of our criminal justice system. This progress is welcomed and must now become the baseline against which minimum service standards are set. We know that more can be done and I would urge that justice agencies do not become complacent or see this as 'job done', but view it as the start of a journey towards even greater public confidence. Details: Belfast: Criminal Justice Inspection Northern Ireland, 2015. 43p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 3, 2015 at: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/7c/7c2edadb-98a3-4ff8-a5f8-dd78d5bd254d.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.cjini.org/CJNI/files/7c/7c2edadb-98a3-4ff8-a5f8-dd78d5bd254d.pdf Shelf Number: 135153 Keywords: Victim Services (Northern Ireland)Victims of CrimeWitnesses |
Author: Willoughby, Maria Title: Witnessing Crime: Findings from the Crime Survey for England and Wales 2013/14 Summary: Witnesses are key to ensuring that justice is delivered and as such they play an important part in the Criminal Justice System (CJS). Understanding the extent to which people witness crime and the attitudes witnesses of crime have towards the CJS is important for the Ministry of Justice (MoJ). This report provides an overview of the extent to which people witness crime, whether witnesses go on to interact with the police and their levels of confidence in the CJS. The report is based on an analysis of the 2013/14 Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW). Key findings - Around a third (32%) of adults reported that they had seen at least one incident of threatening or violent behaviour, shoplifting, vandalism, burglary, theft of or from a vehicle, or someone being mugged or robbed in the 12 months prior to interview. The most commonly witnessed type of crime was threatening or violent behaviour (24% of all adults, and 74% of witnesses). - Young adults (aged 16-24 years) were particularly likely to have witnessed a crime, with 52 per cent having witnessed at least one of the crime types asked about in the 12 months prior to interview. - Adults who frequently visited pubs or bars were more likely to have witnessed a crime (52% of those visiting pubs or bars three or more times a week compared with 25% who had not visited any in the previous month), as were adults who had used illegal drugs in the 12 months prior to interview (62% compared with 37% who had not used such drugs). - Victims of crime were nearly twice as likely to have witnessed a crime (excluding the crime of which they were a victim) than non-victims (47% compared with 29%). - Of those who said they had witnessed a crime, 16 per cent had contact with the police with regard to the incident. The most commonly cited reason for not contacting the police was that a third party was already dealing with the incident - Those who had witnessed a crime in the last 12 months were less likely to say that they were very or fairly confident that the CJS as a whole is effective than those who had not witnessed a crime (42% compared with 51%) and less likely to say that they were very or fairly confident that the CJS is fair (57% and 68% respectively). Witnesses' attitudes towards the CJS did not vary by whether they had contact with the police in relation to the most recent incident they witnessed. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2015. 16p. Source: Internet Resource: Analytical Summary: Accessed July 30, 2015 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449584/witnessing-crime-findings-from-crime-survey.pdf Year: 2015 Country: United Kingdom URL: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/449584/witnessing-crime-findings-from-crime-survey.pdf Shelf Number: 136269 Keywords: Witnesses |
Author: Steblay, Nancy K. Title: Reduction of False Convictions through Improved Identification Procedures: Further Refinements for Street Practice and Public Policy Summary: The project purpose was to enhance the quality and probative value of forensic eyewitness memory evidence acquired through police lineup procedures. Specific objectives were: (1) An updated meta-analytic review of research comparing simultaneous to sequential lineup formats; an evaluation of the sequential superiority effect and articulation of factors that moderate this effect; (2) (3) Controlled laboratory testing of the impact on eyewitness accuracy of three individual lineup procedural components: relaxation of the Yes/No dichotomous response requirement of the sequential lineup procedure (to allow I'm not sure responses); an Appearance Change Instruction to eyewitnesses; and use of multiple identification tasks with the same witness; (3) Collection and analysis of data in collaboration with the Tucson (Arizona) Police Department to compare eyewitness performance on lineup identifications under double-blind simultaneous versus double-blind sequential lineup procedures. This research integrated these three informational components to generate refined recommendations for field practice and public policy. Sequential lineup superiority was established in both laboratory (meta-analysis) and a field test. In addition, the new laboratory data indicate a positive benefit on eyewitness identification accuracy of a not-sure response option for witnesses, only minimal impact of an Appearance Change Instruction, and a significant negative outcome from repeated lineups Details: Final report to the U.S. Department of Justice, 2012. 92p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 24, 2015 at: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249006.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United States URL: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/249006.pdf Shelf Number: 136567 Keywords: Eyewitness IdentificationLineupsPolice Policies and ProceduresWitnesses |
Author: Kariri, Jamima Njeri Title: Witness Protection: Facilitating justice for complex crimes Summary: Responding appropriately to complex transnational and international crimes requires a multifaceted approach that includes a robust criminal justice response. Witness testimony is a crucial part of this. Witnesses, and often their family members, can face significant danger given their crucial role in obtaining a conviction. Africa has seen situations where witness intimidation and harm have led to case dismissals and acquittals. Ultimately, justice fails in these circumstances. Obstacles such as insufficient funding, shortage of skills and weak political will must be addressed. Details: Pretoria: Institute for Security Studies, 2017. 12p. Source: Internet Resource: Policy Brief 88: Accessed September 27, 2017 at: https://oldsite.issafrica.org/uploads/policybrief88.pdf Year: 2016 Country: Africa URL: https://oldsite.issafrica.org/uploads/policybrief88.pdf Shelf Number: 147477 Keywords: Witness Intimation Witness Protection Witnesses |
Author: Crijns, J.H. Title: Collaboration with Justice in the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Canada. A comparative study on the provision of undertakings to offenders who are willing to give evidence in the prosecution of others Summary: 1.1 Background, purpose and research questions One of the more far-reaching investigative tools in criminal cases is the instrument of collaboration with justice, the measure by which undertakings are made to otherwise unwilling offender witnesses, i.e. witnesses who themselves are suspected or who have been found guilty of committing a criminal offence, in order to persuade them to cooperate with the authorities, by giving (incriminating) evidence in the prosecution of others. While the instrument is generally viewed as a useful tool for penetrating the higher echelons of a criminal organization, it is not uncontroversial, entailing as it does the promise of benefits to persons who themselves are suspected of, or who have been found guilty of, committing a criminal offence, thereby posing a risk to the reliability of the testimony as well as to the integrity of the proceedings and the criminal justice system more generally. This study aims to gain insight into the legal avenues available for making undertakings to witnesses in exchange for their evidence in several countries the Netherlands, Germany, Italy and Canada , ultimately with a view to drawing lessons from the comparative exercise for the Netherlands in particular. The Netherlands has had a statutory provision since 2006 on collaboration with justice. However, since its introduction into the Code of Criminal Procedure, it has been applied in only a handful of cases, while one of those cases in particular Passage has raised important and sometimes difficult questions concerning the nature and applicability of the statutory provision. In July 2013 six months after passing judgment in the first instance in the Passage case the then (Dutch) Minister of Security and Justice sent a letter to the Lower House of Parliament in which he indicated that in the context of effectively combatting organized crime, he considered it necessary to widen the scope for working with members of the civilian population who themselves are or have been active in groups which are subject to investigation, or who are in some way closely related to members of such groups. The statutory framework which currently applies to the instrument of collaboration with justice was felt to be too restrictive, in the ministers view. For these reasons he announced that a bill would be prepared that provides for a widening of the Public Prosecution Services [] room to negotiate in order, in exceptional situations, to be able to make greater undertakings than are now possible. As an example the minister referred to undertakings to reduce sentences by more than half, i.e. more than may currently be granted, without this amounting to an undertaking of complete immunity from prosecution, or providing financial compensation, which is currently forbidden. The minister also indicated that he wanted to make the instrument of collaboration with justice available for more offences than is currently possible under the statutory provisions, and for economic and financial crime and corruption, in particular. As part of the current legislative process for modernising the Dutch Code of Criminal Procedure, this topic is once again up for consideration by the Dutch legislator. In drawing lessons from the comparative exercise for the Netherlands, then, the more specific aim of this study is to provide input for the purpose of the determination of whether or not to introduce a new statutory provision on collaboration with justice or to refine the existing one. In examining each of the four countries, it will be considered how the instrument has been legally framed, along with how it is applied in practice, and what kinds of problems and public debate that has engendered. Accordingly, this study is not only concerned with the law in the books, but also the law in action, and this is reflected in the research questions (as well as the more general aim of the study, as set out above). Thus, the main questions to be answered in this study are as follows. a) How is the instrument of collaboration with justice (hereafter: the instrument) regulated in each of the countries under examination? b) How is the instrument applied in practice in each of the countries under examination, and what are the experiences and results achieved in this regard? c) How does the relevant law and practice in Germany, Italy and Canada compare to that in the Netherlands? Details: Leiden: University of Leiden, Criminal law and Criminology, 2017. 400p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 2, 2018 at: https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2018/05/01/tk-bijlage-1-collaboration-with-justice-in-the-netherlands-germany-italy-and-canada Year: 2017 Country: International URL: https://www.rijksoverheid.nl/documenten/rapporten/2018/05/01/tk-bijlage-1-collaboration-with-justice-in-the-netherlands-germany-italy-and-canada Shelf Number: 149981 Keywords: Collaboration Criminal Evidence Criminal Investigation Criminal Prosecution Evidence Gathering Organized Crime Witnesses |