Should the naive get a re-trial

Results | Messages | Flag Flag this content as inappropriate. Examples include sexual content involving or targeting children
as well as predatorial behavior.

Flag this content as inappropriate. Examples include sexual content involving or targeting children
as well as predatorial behavior.

Should people with a conviction have a re-trial if there was evidence withheld and a witness lied.

Should people with a conviction have a their case brought before an appeals court if there was evidence withheld and a witness lied.

a) They should be guaranteed a new Trial because a star witness lied but not if it was some technicality

b) Yes! they should recieve an immediate public sympathy and attention and a fair trial if it was a star witness that lied .

c) Neither! The prosecutor should explain the reasons for the mistakes and the conviction be upheld despite the unfair prosecution.

d) NO! The conivicted person's case should only be examined if the appeal courts courtclerk & judge grants permission.

e) Only if a Barrister thinks there is a legal case.

If the accused is not a criminal and has no previous and the witness was the star in the prosecution against him/her and also this would allow the accused to prove they were framed and are innocent.

I think technicalities in the law should not be used to prevent obvious miscarriages of justice.Although i accept that guilty people will walk free because of police incompetence but i do not believe the innocent should suffer for the sake of many.

This poll was created on 2007-09-10 15:04:43 by blanchedsoldier