Criminal Justice System Flashcards
(74 cards)
Summary Offence
These are minor offences such as drink driving, driving an unregistered vehicle or disorderly conduct.
Heard in a Magistrates’ court
Never use juries in Magistrates’ court
Summary Offences
Indictable Offence
These are serious criminal offences such as murder, culpable driving causing death or drug trafficking
Can indictable offences be heard summarily?
Yes they can!
Trials for certain minor indictable offences can be heard summarily in the Magistrates’ court.
> The offences has a penalty not exceeding 10 years imprisonment
> The court and accused agrees to have case heard summarily
Requirements of an indictable case heard summarily
What are examples of Indictable offences able to be heard summarily?
> Recklessly causing injury
> Obtaining property by deception (under $100,000)
> Theft, Robbery and Burglary (under $100,000)
Committal Proceedings
> Are used when the accused pleads not guilty to an indictable offence
> Determine if an indictable offence can be heard and determined summarily.
> It is where the parties present their case.
Burden of Proof
Refers to the responsibility of proving the facts of a case. Thus, in criminal cases, the prosecution has the burden of proof.
Refers to the strength of the evidence required to prove the guilt of the accused.
Standard of Proof
What is Beyond Reasonable Doubt?
The standard of proof applicable in criminal proceedings which required the prosecution to prove that there is no reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty of the crime(s) they have been charged with.
Presumption of Innocence
The right for all accused persons to be presumed innocent until it is proven, beyond a reasonable doubt, that they are guilty.
What are the features of criminal justice that upholds the presumption of innocence
> Right to silence
> Right to apply for bail
> Right to appeal a case
How do you get bail?
> The accused has the right to apply for bail. Thus, if the accused is refused, they will be detained (remanded) is custody until the case is determined by a court.
> Having bail means the defendant have the opportunity to prepare for the court case.
> The rights to be tried without unreasonable delay
> The right to silence
> The rights to trial by jury
The rights of an accused
The right to be tried without unreasonable delay
ensures an accused person has their case heard in a timely fashion. Hence, delays of the trial should only occur when a court considers such delays ‘reasonable’.
What are factors that may be considered by a court to determine if the delay was ‘unreasonable’
> Length of Delay
> Numbers of offences committed
> Complexity of the case
> Reasons for the delay
The right to silence
Ensures the presumption of innocence is upheld as an accused person’s choice to not speak during questioning or in court cannot be viewed as a sign of guilt.
When can the right to silence be exercised?
> when being confronted by law enforcement at the time of an arrest or when being accused of committing an offence.
> In a court of law, meaning an accused can choose to remain silent instead of defending themselves against the prosecution.
The right to trial by jury
Allows an accused persons to have their guilt, for the offence they have been accused for, to be determined by impartial members of the community rather than a single judge.
Thus, this right applies to people accused of INDICTABLE offences, who plead NOT guilty.
Strengths of the right to be tried without unreasonable delay
> The accused does not have to endure prolonged periods of stress and anxiety while awaiting for they trial to begin
> Witnesses are more likely to remember the key facts of the events they saw if a criminal trial takes place in a reasonable time after the events in question occurred.
Limitations of the right to be tried without unreasonable delay
> Trial = delayed, may still be considered ‘reasonable’ if the delay was a result of actions of the accused (e.g.. their alleged crime being particularly complex)
> If delayed, there is a risk of the memory of the witness fading or a witness may pass away, preventing a fair trial from being achieved.
Strengths of the right to silence
> Presumption of innocence is upheld by the right to silence as an accused is presumed innocent, does not need to say anything to achieve this presumption.
> Reduces the power imbalance between the prosecution and the accuses as police are unable to coerce an accused into making false confessions.
Limitations of the right to silence
> Although judge may direct a jury that an accused’s silence is not an indicator of their guilt, a jury may still inadvertently believe an accused failing to defend themselves is an indicator of guilt = potentially unfair results is produced.
> Can cause accused to be uncooperative with police, possibly resulting in barriers to justice for the victim/s
Strengths of the right to trial by jury
> The use of a jury aims to ensure an accurate reflection of society is selected at random to determine an accused’s guilt = promoting fairness, as the jury is inherently impartial when making determinations
> Jury will encourage lawyers to speak clearly and avoid using legal jargon when presenting their evidence, promoting access as jurors and the parties can gain a better understanding of the court proceedings.
