What's your verdict? - OpenLearn - Open University

Skip to content

You are here:
Home
Society
The Law
Criminology
What's your verdict?

Comments (6) Twitter Share Share

Print

What's Your Verdict? screengrab
Start What's Your Verdict?

Explore Justice on OpenLearn

Study at the OU

About the author

Comments

To comment on this page Sign in or Register.

Richard Ayres

07 May 201112:40

I agree very poor evidence for prosecution so many of these facts could easily have been checked.
Medical reports, internet activities etc.

The lawyers did not seek out

Tall Paul

11 Mar 201117:21

The lawyers did not seek out evidence to support:

* claim of 'back injury'; whether or not his Dr could confirm pain relief
* whether or not the list data was fantasy football names and scores or were in fact contacts for selling drugs

there was no evidence of actual supplying of drugs to another person
even though there was cause for concern.

Evidence is so difficult and even when true people can manipulate it and present it in ways that are unfair and injustice results.

This not only happens in courts but happens quite often in industrial tribunals, internal investigations and the like - they are often undertaken by bigoted and biased people so no surprise there then !!!!

Whats your verdict

John Russell

03 Feb 201114:04

i took part in it and got it right however there was some argument on both sides the prosecution could of argued that he wouldn't need a sandwich unless he was driving all day or out all day but he as a bad back so wouldnt be able to do that and he might be on other benefits like dla so why isn't he?however because he didnt have anymore paraphernalia like scales or they was not ready wrapped it could of gone either way

Got the vedict right. It

Sandra Stewardson

03 Feb 201118:47

Got the vedict right. It could have been argued that he didn't need to keep the sandwich bags in the car, the kitchen would be the most likely place for those. Who takes sandwixh bags out with them? Also the note book would have most probably been kept at home. Most importantly phone numbers are totally differnt from football scores.

Poor representation bty defence.

Paul Faulkner

21 Feb 201103:58

It should have been stressed more that proof beyond doubt was needed to convict the defendant. If there was any doubt at all, however small, the jury had an obligation to return a not guilty verdict. The defence should have argued thus : That there was doubt as to whether the bags were to be used for drug deals, as there was no drug in them at the time, the size of the bag was also at odds with the size often used as drug paraphanalia. Where were the bags found in relation to the drugs / driver.? There was no proof that any of the details in the note book corresponded to the names ,addresses or telephone numbers of any person known to the police to have any connection with drugs. The defendant's computer would have provided evidence of his online gaming, yet it was not checked, again suggesting that the investigation was not thorough and further throwing doubt as to the allegation.

Again, reasonable doubt means NOT GUILTY.

( I should add at this time, that my personal opinion is that convicted drug dealers should face the rope. If this were a real case, it clearly demonstrates shoddy work by the legal system and just how uneducated the general public are. )

These responses are really

Peter Ward

09 Feb 201213:27

These responses are really interesting. In fact, there is no "right" or "wrong" verdict here as the outcome changes depending on your answers as you proceed through this interactive.

When I co-wrote the script for this I deliberately wanted to leave some issues as vague ones so that people could interpret them in different ways. Obviously in a real trial many of the factual issues would have been clarified beforehand, e.g. medical evidence of back pain, checking the list of contacts in the notebook.

The purpose of this exercise was to look at what sort of facts affect "justice" and there is more than one outcome to this depending on which answers you choose.

I am glad that you have taken the time to participate in this.

Peter Ward

Copyright & revisions

Publication details

Originally published: Monday, 17th January 2011
Last updated on: Monday, 17th January 2011

Copyright information

Body text - Copyright: The Open University

Feeds

If you enjoyed this, why not follow a feed to find out when we have new things like it? Choose an RSS feed from the list below. (Don't know what to do with RSS feeds?)
Remember, you can also make your own, personal feed by combining tags from around OpenLearn.

Page Tags

Sign in or create a free account to add tags to your personal tag cloud using:

Ratings

About this site

OpenLearn: free learning from The Open University

Explore with the OU’s experts
Try extracts from course materials
Watch, listen and interact

Sign In Sign Up Help