Nanotechnology: A Powerful Tool in Forensic Science for Solving Criminal Cases

Nanotechnology has emerged as a phoenix in the field of forensic science and proved to be of great importance in solving criminal cases where other techniques failed to provide conclusive results. This field of science possess humongous potential in the field of forensic science and assist in crime detection. It holds huge amount of value in making a positive contribution in assisting forensic experts and scientists in nabbing the criminals and most importantly prevent any wrongful conviction. In the past decade, many researchers have reported the satisfactory application of Nano technique in Forensic Science for the analysis of latent fingerprints, drugs in alleged drug-facilitated crimes, warfare agent detection, DNA analysis, counter terrorism, GSR detection, post-blast residue analysis, security measures, etc. It has been proved to be a robust approach for the detection of crime with greater selectivity, sensitivity, reliability and results are produced in a timely appropriate manner. The constant development of nanotechnology and its application in the field of Forensic Science over the past decade has been highlighted in this review article.

Wrongful Conviction in Sexual Assault: Stranger Rape, Acquaintance Rape, and Intra-Familial Child Sexual Assaults

NA

Compensation for Wrongful Conviction/Miscarriage of Justice in Hong Kong in Light of A v Secretary for Justice and Another [2020] hkcfi 427; hcal 176/2018 (11 March 2020)

Article 14(6) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (iccpr) provides for the right to compensation for wrongful conviction or miscarriage of justice. In Hong Kong, there are two compensation schemes for people who have been wrongfully convicted – the statutory scheme under Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance and the ex gratia scheme (also applicable to wrongful imprisonment). Although there are cases in which Hong Kong courts have dealt with the right to compensation under the ex gratia scheme, it was only in March 2020, in A v Secretary for Justice and Another, that the High Court, for the first time, dealt with a case on the right to compensation under Article 11(5). In this article, the author discusses the right to compensation for wrongful conviction in Hong Kong generally and in particular under Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance. The author deals with the case of A v Secretary for Justice and Another and illustrates how the High Court’s interpretation of Article 11(5) of the Bill of Rights Ordinance is likely to impact on the right to compensation for wrongful conviction in Hong Kong in the future.

A felismerési kísérlet összehasonlítása más bizonyítási cselekményekkel

Minden emberi tevékenység magában hordozza a hibázás lehetőségét. Ez alól a kriminalisták, jogalkalmazók sem kivételek. Jogállamban a legsúlyosabb hibakövetkezmény az úgynevezett „justizmord”, „jogi halál”, „bírói halál”, a téves ítélet, a hibás felelősségre vonás, a nem bűnös személy bűnösnek nyilvánítása. (Angol terminusai változatosak: miscarriage of justice, wrongful conviction, mistaken conviction, falsely convicted, falsely sentenced, unsafe conviction.) A felismerésre bemutatás elhibázása „justizmord” veszélyű (kiemelten veszélyes vagy „legveszélyesebb” kategória). Ennek megelőzése érdekében fontos e bizonyítási metódus vizsgálata, összehasonlítása más bizonyítási cselekményekkel.

Racial Animus, Police Corruption, and a Wrongful Conviction of Murder

It is one thing to faithfully report and investigate police corruption; it is another thing to effectively punish abusive officers and the institutions that support them. A third, arguably the most fundamental concern of all, is to understand why these officers, and the infrastructures that protect them, rarely face repercussions for their crimes and the catastrophic psychological traumas that they inflict. The case described herein – a wrongful conviction of murder (1991) that was eventually overturned (2010) and then successfully litigated for restitution (2021) – provides a vivid narrative of prosecutorial misconduct, and the consequent psychological anguish of a survivor, as informed and articulated by participant-observers. Our hope is that by doing so, we can facilitate an understanding for, and empathy with, the trials and tribulations of victims of color who have suffered tremendously from police corruption and wrongful convictions.

Causes of Wrongful Conviction and the Challenges Involved in Convincing Courts to Reopen Cases of Wrongful Conviction

NA

Bringing narrative victimology to transitional justice: Blame, victimhood and life stories of wrongful conviction

This article applies a narrative victimological lens of inquiry to the memoirs of those wrongfully convicted of high profile politically violent offences arising from the conflict in the North of Ireland. Using these life stories of wrongful conviction, the article critically examines how nuanced and complex understandings of victimhood and blame emerge from within victims’ own testimony. While on the one hand, victims can ‘story’ victimhood and blame in simplistic ways that echo dominant paradigms found within the criminological literature, at the same time they can ‘story’ victimhood and blame in more sophisticated ways that reflect complex debates found within the transitional justice literature. The ability to take both a more generous approach to victimhood that recognises the harm experienced by others and a more critically self-reflective approach of one's own culpability, it is submitted, shows the potential value that proposed oral history mechanisms have in allowing different perspectives on victimhood and blame to emerge from the testimony of those who suffered harms like wrongful conviction.

Exonerating DNA Evidence in Overturned Convictions: Analysis of Data Obtained From the National Registry of Exonerations

In recent years, advances in DNA testing technology have been coupled with DNA exonerations. In response, increasing public and empirical attention have been given to the experiences of those wrongfully convicted by the criminal justice system. Several jurisdictions have created Conviction Integrity Units (CIUs) to review convictions of primarily violent defendants for wrongful conviction. However, empirical examination of the impact of CIUs and other factors predicting DNA exoneration remains limited. This study uses data from the National Registry of Exonerations to examine the impact of CIUs, location of conviction, and other factors that make exonerations more likely to feature DNA evidence. Findings suggest that offense type, year of conviction, and gender are significant predictors of DNA exoneration. Policy implications are also discussed.

Maintaining Innocence

Modern research has been diligent and successful in discovering what causes a wrongful conviction and long-term consequences on the wrongfully convicted person and their family. However, there is one area that remains relatively untouched by research efforts. It is the period between the conviction and the release, the period of incarceration itself. The purpose of this paper is to outline the experiences of wrongfully convicted persons in prison. While each incarceration term is an individualized experience, there are many commonalities within these experiences. This paper will consider the incarceration experience via two lenses: Part I will look at inmate and prison violence, and Part II will explore mental health and segregation. The paper will focus largely on the Canadian perspective, with limited insights from other jurisdictions. Each section will also evaluate: (1) the general prison experience for all incarcerated persons, and (2) the distinct prison experiences of the wrongfully convicted as a result of maintaining their innocence. Because little research exists on the distinct experiences of wrongfully convicted persons in prison, this paper looks to interviews and other sources where wrongfully convicted persons discussed their prison experiences. These sources are few and far between, with many wrongfully convicted persons echoing the words of Thomas Sophonow (wrongfully convicted of the murder of a 16-year-old donut shop employee), “whatever happened in jail [is] nobody’s business.”