Should the naive get a re-trial
Looking for the old results?
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.
| 50% (2) | a) They should be guaranteed a new Trial because a star witness lied but not if it was some technicality | |
|---|---|---|
| 25% (1) | b) Yes! they should recieve an immediate public sympathy and attention and a fair trial if it was a star witness that lied . | |
| 0% (0) | c) Neither! The prosecutor should explain the reasons for the mistakes and the conviction be upheld despite the unfair prosecution. | |
| 0% (0) | d) NO! The conivicted person's case should only be examined if the appeal courts courtclerk & judge grants permission. | |
| 0% (0) | e) Only if a Barrister thinks there is a legal case. | |
| 25% (1) | 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. | |
| 25% (1) | 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. |
4 voters have answered this question.
This poll was created on 2007-09-10 15:04:43
by blanchedsoldier
