@article{ref1,
title="Forensic science and expert testimony in wrongful convictions: a study of decision-making at the criminal cases review commission",
journal="British journal of criminology",
year="2019",
author="Hoyle, Carolyn",
volume="59",
number="4",
pages="919-937",
abstract="The Criminal Cases Review Commission reviews possible wrongful convictions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, referring back to the Court of Appeal cases where there is a 'real possibility' that the conviction is unsafe. This article presents findings from a four-year empirical study of decision-making within the Commission. It explores how Commission staff exercise their discretionary powers in identifying and investigating possible wrongful convictions from approximately 1,400 applications a year, referring just a few back to the Court. It focuses on a sample of cases that turned on forensic evidence and expert testimony, showing that while there is some variation in individual caseworkers' approaches to investigation, decision-making is shaped by the law and internal policies such that reasonably consistent decision frames emerge.   © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies (ISTD). All rights reserved.<p /> <p>Language: en</p>",
language="en",
issn="0007-0955",
doi="10.1093/bjc/azy066",
url="http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azy066"
}