Programme Report the institute for advanced studies
hosted by the University of Strathclyde Programme Title “Miscarriages of Justice in Scotland” Final Report Michael Bromby Department of Law, School of Law and Social Sciences Glasgow Caledonian University 1) Programme background This programme addressed the legal and socio‐economic mechanisms currently in place to identify miscarriages of justice in Scotland, and the opportunities to address these causes or to redress the effects of miscarriages of justice. Research into miscarriages of justice is, by its very nature, cross‐disciplinary involving a range of legal, political, social, economic and psychological issues. Key figures within Scotland exist in these disciplines and were drawn together under the common theme of justice. Outwith Scotland, key participants from England and Wales, the US and other common‐law and Commonwealth jurisdictions added expertise from distinctly different legal systems. Research Questions 1. How are miscarriages of justice identified? Does the legal system adequately provide avenues for appeal in a timely and effective fashion? The appellate structure of the criminal courts, coupled with European and ECHR legislation being dealt with by both the Privy Council and the European Courts, makes for a lengthy procedure. Can or should this be reformed? 2. How do those claiming innocence fit with the current legal aid system? Access to funds following a conviction is often limited and restricted in terms of appeal. Can and should this change? Can a legal system maintain public confidence and effectively manage the availability of publicly funded legal representation in this situation? 3. How does a claim of innocence affect parole eligibility? The current requirements to acknowledge guilt and remorse for criminal acts will be challenged to incorporate a category for those claiming innocence and address the nature and availability of prison programmes. 4. Can further assistance be given to successful innocent persons who have spent considerable time in prison? Beyond compensation, is there a need for re‐
integration, psychological counseling and other social issues that are in limited supply and solely from charitable organizations? 5. How is legal education framed and can law students be shaped by the consideration of miscarriages of justice to provide ultimately a different breed of practicing lawyers with new skills? Format Three sets of events and activities based at the Institute were planned to work towards answering the research questions in the period August 2009 to March 2010. These were: forensic evidence, legal education and jury research. Activities included conference‐style presentations, round table discussions, workshops and a symposium. 1 | P a g e 2) Breakdown of programme activities A. Forensic Evidence This event attempted to address key concepts and definitions for the programme. The first event involved academics, policy makers and practitioners to establish common understandings, potential collaborative developments and gaps in. The format was a round‐table event where brief 15 minute presentations were given by participants and longer periods of 45 minutes were provided for debate and discussion under the Chatham House rule to promote frank and open discussion. The aims and research questions for the programme were circulated in advance and a limited number of 15 participants were invited from key organizations to represent academia, the Scottish Government, forensic scientists, the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission and reform campaign groups. B. Legal Education This event was designed to examine the use of clinical legal education to educate students and potentially future lawyers as to the pitfalls and possibilities of errors in the justice system. The format included practical workshops for students to attend and participate in the construction of an annotated bibliography. 14 students attended the event from four different universities: Glasgow Caledonian University, University of Leeds, University of Sheffield and University of Stirling; comprising both undergraduate law students and postgraduate psychology students. The majority of students were involved with a university based Innocence Project, whilst others held interests in the area. Prior to the event, a total of 16 entries to the annotated bibliography were made. During the event, a further 20 entries were made. Discussion took place as to what type of publications should be included, what the note should contain and the nature and extent of associated tags for each entry. Students worked in mixed groups from different subjects and from different institutions to create, edit and review the bibliography. Students were also motivated to continue to add resources on their return to their home institutions and to encourage their peers to become involved. Documentation was made available to facilitate this ongoing process using the IAS website. 2 | P a g e C. Jury Research This event was not specifically planned in the original proposal and arose out of developments during the earlier stages of the programme that identified a need to address possible miscarriages of justice that could occur through the jury system that is in place across the UK. This two‐day event was well‐attended by research‐active academics in a range of disciplines, all of whom are studying juries. The plenary session centred on “Are Juries Fair?”, the most recent Ministry of Justice publication utilising research on real jurors in England. The author, Prof Cheryl Thomas (University College London), presented the Report, which was followed by formal responses from Maggie Scott QC (Advocate and Sheriff), & Prof Antony Duff (Stirling University), chaired by Prof Lindsay Farmer (Glasgow University). Most significantly, Professor Thomas also spoke about “The Myths of Jury Research”, proposing that the Contempt of Court Act 1981 is no barrier to research utilising real jurors. The Report, Responses and Myth‐busting prompted vigorous questions and discussion from the audience, including proposals for further research. The remainder of the Symposium comprised a variety of talks from jury researchers, culminating in an agreement to form a Jury Research Network. This Network will provide inter‐disciplinary, cross‐institutional resources for jury researchers, including collaborative research projects, methodological support and advice, joint funding initiatives, cross‐
jurisdictional approaches, annual meetings, and a members’ website. The Symposium outcomes will include two publications: one summarising the “Are Juries Fair?” session, the other setting out the common themes in modern jury research which have emerged from this Symposium. 3 | P a g e 3) Outputs and outcomes This section outlines the outputs of the programme to date (May 2010), further outputs will be pursued as follow‐on events take place and the Jury Research Network built during the programme evolves. Briefing Notes ‐Two briefing notes were produced from the first event through round table discussions with academics, practitioners and policy makers: ‐Briefing Note 1: Miscarriages of Justice in Scotland ‐ Defining and quantifying ‐Briefing Note 2: Miscarriages of Justice in Scotland ‐ Areas of concern for forensic evidence Annotated bibliography An annotated bibliography on refugee integration issues was compiled by the participants of the second strand of the programme, with input from other collaborators. The bibliography has been made accessible to the delegates attending the programme’s events and more widely to staff and students involved in the many academic disciplines that may use these resources for teaching and research. Work‐related Learning The second strand of the programme relating to education will be developed by the Caledonian Academy (Glasgow Caledonian University). The project aims to raise the profile of employability across the university through encouraging all schools to embed work‐
related learning activities into their programmes, use innovative approaches in learning and teaching to enhance their students' professional skills and engage with employers on a regular basis. Published research paper SSRN Research paper http://papers.ssrn.com/ abstract=1590047 “Michael C. Bromby of the Department of Law at Glasgow Caledonian University presented a paper on March 26, 2010 to the Jury Research Symposium in Glasgow Scotland called, “The Temptation to Tweet – Jurors’s Activities Outside the Trial”. The paper depicts a novel research idea. He searched the social networking site “Twitter” during one 24 hour period to see what types of miscreant behavior juror, or people who claimed to be on jury duty, might be doing. The results of the study will not be surprising to regular readers of the Jur‐E Bulletin. However, this is a short and fun study to read.” [From Jur‐E‐Bulletin, April, 2010]. PhD Studentship A PhD studentship in Law has been awarded by the Institute for Society and Social Justice Research (Glasgow Caledonian University) for postgraduate research on gender and juries, entitled: Gender on Trial: Narratives & Effects in Scottish Jury Trials. “A significant knowledge gap exists in terms of research exploring the narratives & effects of jury trials where gender is undeniably an issue: domestic violence crimes where women kill violent partners (Galbraith), fatal self‐defence in rape trials and crimes against children (Bone). Whilst academics writing on Scots law have commented on such issues as the accountability of juries (Jackson: 2003), the accused’s right to a trial by jury (Duff: 2000) & how juries 4 | P a g e understand complex information (Logie et al: 1986), little has been said on the role of gender in criminal trials & the potential effects this has on juries’ decision‐making. This socio‐legal project will make an original contribution to understanding the role of gender in criminal justice and how juries make decisions through its focus on female perpetrators in criminal jury trials; an area which has received little attention internationally and none in the Scottish context.” Jury Research Network The final symposium led to the establishment of a cross‐discipline network, which will have the following objectives: • Mailing list • Advertising related events • Finding expertise • Applying for funding • Inviting speakers • Interaction with practitioners/bench • Annual events Monograph on “What are Juries For?” Rhonda Wheate will be editing a book with chapters from contributors to the Jury Symposium to be published by Palgrave MacMillan. The book will bring together the best in modern jury research – both the theoretical and empirical aspects. The book will cover a range of relevant disciplines (law, philosophy, legal theory, psychology, criminology, sociology etc) and will explore both the theoretical underpinnings and the practical, empirically‐based research on juries. It will contribute to Palgrave’s socio‐legal series, edited by Prof Dave Cowan at the University of Bristol. Based on our discussions at the Jury Symposium, the underlying theme of the book will be the fundamental normative question: What are juries for? We envisage that 10 chapters of approximately 10K words each would be sufficient to create a book which would appeal to both legal practitioners/policy makers and academics interested in the jury system in the UK. Second Jury Research Symposium Hayley Ness and Michael Bromby organised a series of one‐day seminars to complement the jury symposium at the Istitute for Advanced Studies at Strathclyde University in March 2010. “The 1st seminar on 'juror perception of visual evidence' was held at the Open University on the 11th June. The focus was on CCTV evidence, facial mapping, computer animations and simulations. We're interested particularly in ‐ the role of the 'expert'; how visual evidence is described to a jury; what impact it may have on decision‐making; whether presenting certain types of evidence visually is prejudicial or facilitative and how jurors perceive technology. In total, 9 papers were presented from a range of disciplines (history, computer science, design, psychology and law) and from both academics and forensic/legal practitioners.” Further events are planned, including the possibility of a student/postgraduate text on forensic sciences aimed at the law, psychology and humanities. 5 | P a g e Appendix: List of participants Sarah Armstrong Scottish Centre for Criminal Justice Research Michael Bromby Reader in Law George Burgess Criminal Justice Directorate Scottish Government Liz Campbell Lecturer in Law University of Aberdeen Mark Coen Lecturer in Law Trinity College, Dublin Fiona Devlin Law student Glasgow Caledonian University Anthony Duff Professor in Philosophy University of Stirling Peter Duff Professor in Law University of Aberdeen Glasgow Caledonian University Louise Ellison Senior lecturer in law University of Leeds Lindsay Farmer Professor in Law University of Glasgow Lynn Hancock Lecturer in Sociology Darragh Hare Scottish Policy Innovation Forum Kathleen Harrison Psychology student Glasgow Caledonian University Peter Hill Television producer http://www.raybrook.co.uk Niamh Howlin Lecturer in Law Queens University, Belfast Sue Hunter Psychology lecturer University of Stirling George Irving Commissioner Scottish Criminal Cases Review Comm. Allan Jamieson Expert witness The Forensic Institute Jenny Johnston Lecturer in Law University of Newcastle David Kerr Law student Glasgow Caledonian University Melanie Lamb Psychology Department University of Liverpool University of Stirling 6 | P a g e Sandra Lean Journalist University of Stirling Fiona Leverick Department of Law University of Glasgow Zhang Li Psychology student University of Stirling Claire Lightowler Scottish Centre for Criminal Justice Research David MacKinnon Law student Kerry Manning Department of Psychology University of Central Lancashire Danielle Manson Law student University of Sheffield Sandra Marshall Professor of Philosophy University of Stirling Roger Matthews Professor in Criminology London South Bank University John Mayer Advocate Glasgow Caledonian University Faculty of Advocates, Edinburgh Mark McAuley Law student Glasgow Caledonian University Sabine McKinnon Caledonian Academy Glasgow Caledonian University Amina Memon Professor in Psychology University of Aberdeen Ash Moloney Law student University of Leeds Jane Morgan Co‐director Institute for Advanced Studies Vanessa Munro Professor of socio‐legal st. University of Nottingham Carmen Murray Law student Glasgow Caledonian University Sally Nelson Department of Linguistics Hayley Ness Forensic Psychology Group Open University Gordon Newall Senior Legal Officer Scottish Criminal Cases Review Comm. Sally Roche Law student University of Sheffield University of Cardiff Ken Rotenberg Professor of Psychology University of Keele Ashley Ryan Psychology student University of Stirling Maggie Scott QC Advocate and p/t Sheriff Faculty of Advocates, Edinburgh 7 | P a g e Burkhard Schafer Senior Lecturer in law University of Edinburgh Gerard Sinclair Chief Executive Scottish Criminal Cases Review Comm. Lisa Smith Department of Psychology University of Leicester Elsa Summers Psychology student University of Stirling Cyrus Tata Department of Law University of Strathclyde Cheryl Thomas Professor of Law University College London Ciara Togher Psychology student Glasgow Caledonian University Grant Walker Department of Psychology University of Stirling Michael Walker Senior Legal Officer Scottish Criminal Cases Review Comm. Amy Wardrop Law student Glasgow Caledonian University Rhonda Wheate Reader in Law Glasgow Caledonian University Samantha Whipp Department of Psychology University of Stirling Lorna Wilson Law student University of Sheffield 8 | P a g e