AC 3.2

• What is a safe verdict?

  A safe verdict is one reached on the basis of all relevant facts after a fair trial.
• What two conditions are necessary to achieve a safe verdict?

  The evidence must be admissible, reliable, credible, and sufficient, and court procedures must be followed correctly.
• What generally causes unsafe verdicts and miscarriages of justice?


  They occur due to problems with the evidence or the trial process itself.
• What can a defendant do if they believe their guilty verdict is unsafe?

  The defendant may seek to appeal against the 'guilty' verdict.
• What are miscarriages of justice?

  They are cases where the innocence of the appellant is proven, often based on fresh evidence.
• What type of evidence often leads to proving innocence in miscarriages of justice?

  Fresh evidence, such as advances in forensic techniques like DNA analysis.
• What happens if the Court of Appeal decides a conviction is a miscarriage of justice?


  The case against the appellant will be dismissed, as the new evidence proves their innocence.
• What are unsafe verdicts also known as?

  Unsafe verdicts are usually called unsafe or wrongful convictions.
• How do miscarriages of justice differ from other wrongful convictions?

  Miscarriages of justice are wrongful convictions where the accused is actually innocent.
• What defects in trial procedures may cause wrongful convictions?

  Defects include the judge misdirecting the jury, making mistakes in legal rulings, and failure to call relevant witnesses.
• What is the significance of the Birmingham Six case?

  It is a well-known miscarriage of justice involving six men wrongfully convicted of bombing pubs in Birmingham.
• When were the Birmingham Six arrested?

  They were arrested on 21 November 1974.
• What treatment did the Birmingham Six endure while in police custody?


  They were deprived of food and sleep, interrogated for long hours, threatened, and beaten.
• What was the outcome of the Birmingham Six's initial trial?

  They were found guilty and each given 21-year sentences.
• What led to the eventual release of the Birmingham Six?

  Fresh evidence of police fabrication and wrongful exclusion of evidence led to their release.
• When were the Birmingham Six freed?

  They were freed on 14 March 1991.
• What was the impact of the Macpherson Report in 1999?

  It called for the removal of the double jeopardy rule, leading to changes in the law.
• What change occurred in the double jeopardy rule in 2003?


  The law was amended to allow a second prosecution for serious crimes if new and compelling evidence is uncovered.
• What evidence led to the re-trial and conviction of Gary Dobson in the Stephen Lawrence case?

  New evidence, including flakes of Stephen Lawrence's blood found on Dobson's jacket.
• How does jury nullification relate to just verdicts?

  Jury nullification occurs when juries reject evidence to reach what they believe is a just verdict.
• Why might juries practice nullification?

  They may believe the existing law or punishment is unfair, inhumane, or immoral.
• What historical example illustrates jury nullification in the 19th century England?


  Juries often refused to condemn petty thieves to death for stealing items worth more than forty shillings.
• What was the Fugitive Slave Act and how did it relate to jury nullification in the 1850s?

  The Fugitive Slave Act required runaway slaves captured in Northern states to be returned, leading juries to practice nullification against it.
• What are the key concepts related to just verdicts?

  • A just verdict is deserved, lawful, and proper.
  • It finds the guilty guilty and the innocent not guilty.
  • The criminal justice system has not always produced just verdicts.
• What are the implications of the double jeopardy rule?

  • Prevents abuse of state power by stopping repeated prosecutions.
  • Allows for a second prosecution if new and compelling evidence is found.
  • Requires the Director of Public Prosecutions to agree that reopening the case is in the public interest.
• What are the consequences of jury equity or jury nullification?

  • Juries may reject evidence to reach a just verdict.
  • This can signal to lawmakers that a law needs changing.
  • Juries' verdicts to acquit are unassailable and cannot be challenged.
• What was the Fugitive Slave Act in the United States?

  The Fugitive Slave Act required runaway slaves captured in the Northern states to be returned to their owners in the South.
• How did juries in Northern states respond to the Fugitive Slave Act?

  Juries in Northern states practiced nullification to protest against the Fugitive Slave Act.
• What was the outcome for defendants accused of harboring fugitive slaves in the North?

  Defendants accused of harboring fugitive slaves were regularly acquitted by juries.
• Who were the two anti-war protesters acquitted in 2000?

  Rosie James and Rachel Wenham were the two anti-war protesters acquitted in 2000.
• What was the reason for James and Wenham's actions against the submarine HMS Vengeance?

  James and Wenham argued that they were acting to prevent a war crime.
• How does the case of James and Wenham relate to Clive Ponting's case?

  Both cases involved individuals who were acquitted despite admitting to their actions.
• What was Alan Blythe charged with in 1995?

  Alan Blythe was charged with cultivating cannabis with intent to supply.
• What defense did Alan Blythe use in his trial?

  Alan Blythe pleaded duress, claiming he was forced by circumstances to commit the crime.
• What was the jury's verdict in Alan Blythe's case?


  The jury returned a not guilty verdict on all charges other than simple cannabis possession.
• What is jury nullification and how can it lead to injustice?

  Jury nullification can lead to injustice when juries refuse to convict defendants despite overwhelming evidence, as seen in cases involving the Ku Klux Klan.
• What factors guide judges in sentencing offenders?

  • The law outlining the possible sentences for a particular offence
  • The Sentencing Guidelines published by the Sentencing Council
• What might a first offender expect if they stole a chocolate bar impulsively?

  A first offender might expect a lower tariff sentence, possibly a conditional discharge.
• How does the sentencing of a 30-year-old with previous convictions differ from that of a first-time offender?

  A 30-year-old with previous convictions who stole to order would attract a much higher tariff, likely resulting in a custodial sentence.
• What is the Unduly Lenient Sentences (ULS) scheme?


  • Allows victims or the public to request a review of sentences deemed too lenient
  • Applies only to serious offences such as murder, manslaughter, and rape
  • The Court of Appeal can increase the sentence if it is significantly below what should have been passed