Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.
A consequential ruling by the UK Supreme Court may spark numerous legal challenges by men found guilty of sexual offenses in Scotland. The court’s decision stated that Scotland’s courts have been following a method of dealing with evidence that risks denying a defendant their right to a fair trial. The case in question involved David Daly and Andrew Keir, who were appealing their rape convictions. Although their appeals were dismissed, the court acknowledged that changes needed to be made in Scotland’s courts regarding the admission of evidence in such cases.
It is anticipated that there will be claims asserting that certain cases dating back to 2017 were wrongful convictions, though the exact number of cases that will make it to the appeal court and the success rate of such appeals remains uncertain. Daly and Keir contended that their fair trial rights were violated because they were unable to present evidence or question the credibility or previous behavior of the complainants. The Supreme Court, while rejecting their appeals, emphasized that the courts must adjust their approach to align with Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Law Society of Scotland welcomed the ruling, while Rape Crisis Scotland expressed disappointment, deeming it a setback.
In recent times, efforts have been made to address longstanding concerns about the low conviction rate in rape and sexual offense cases. The Supreme Court highlighted that evidence regarding a complainant’s credibility or past behavior has typically been excluded from trials for sexual offenses in Scotland. This practice, the court argued, could potentially violate the rights of defendants to a fair trial under the Convention. The judges emphasized the importance of allowing defendants to present a full defense and challenge the prosecution’s evidence within the bounds of fairness.
The judges asserted that, in an adversarial justice system, some intrusive questions to the complainant may be inevitable to ensure a fair trial. While it is crucial to uphold the accused’s right to challenge the complainant’s account and present relevant evidence, the interests of complainants must also be safeguarded. The Law Society of Scotland’s president welcomed the decision, calling for a revision of the approach in Scottish courts to align with parliamentary intentions. However, Sandy Brindley of Rape Crisis Scotland expressed concerns over the potential impact on future cases and survivors, emphasizing the need to balance a complainant’s privacy rights with the right to a fair trial
Read the full article from The BBC here: Read More
Auto Amazon Links: No products found. Blocked by captcha.