Wrongful Conviction Research 2022

Running head: WRONGFUL CONVICTION
1
Wrongful Conviction
Name
Institution

WRONGFUL CONVICTION 2
Wrongful Conviction
Introduction
Wrongful convictions in the system of criminal justice remain not only a United States
Problem but an issue present in many countries. Many researchers argue that numerous justice
systems do not know when wrongful convictions happen. As such, it often makes a debate on
whether some legal system is better as compared to others at correcting and preventing errors of
wrongful conviction since there remain no methods of finding out if such cases happen. If the
system did, then most of the innocent people would not go to prison. Even in the United States,
where there remains an excellent focus on the legal system to prevent errors, innocent people still
find their way to prison. It remains similar to the United Kingdom who has witnessed its fair
share of wrongful convictions. Conversely, Israel and Canada only attempt to prevent wrongful
convictions on major offenses such as rape and murder, but avoid examining minor offenses
against wrongful convictions.
Arguing that one system remains better as compared to the other would be faulty because
all systems remain unique as well as have their own weaknesses and strengths. The weakness or
strength of a justice system remains measured by its capability of administering justice fairly as
expected. Numerous trial procedures, such as in the Canadian judicial system, remain prone to
errors (Weir, 2013). Determining the truth of any case depends on the investigations performed
by the law enforcement officers. Consequently, such partial investigations might lead to a
wrongful conviction since the prosecution side remains biased, and it remains the duty of the
prosecutor to take the accused person to prison. Thus, the prosecutors would distort the evidence
to enable them to convict the accused. Besides, during the trial, the court may order the

WRONGFUL CONVICTION 3
prosecutor to produce records, provide more evidence, as well as prove their case. These mix-
ups, together with the pressure from the general public and the effect are wrongful convictions.
Israel criminal procedures are not created on any law that allows a review of a case.
Because of this, the trial process offers an avenue for abusing by the officials of the state. It can
be fair if all the cases in Israel are reviewed to check any fault that could be made by the
prosecutors. It is true that the rigidity of the legal system of Israel does not allow for reversing
the faulty conviction. Besides, there remain unfair laws that prevent the avenues for appeal. So,
people who have been accused of wrongly cannot seek an appeal. However, there remains a
body that examines wrongfully convicted cases; this body remains not transparent and
independent, which restricts the opportunity of reversing unfair convictions. Therefore, unlike
the United States, the sanctity of Israel's criminal laws remains questionable, as well as cannot be
trusted to provide a remedy to unfairly convicted people.
The recent judicial reforms in Wales and England were created to favor the victims of
crime hence increasing the chances of unfair convictions. In fact, reforms that remain contained
in the white paper remain a threat to most of the suspects (). It is true that the criminal justice
system in England has a conviction rate of approximately 95 percent and does not require more
laws to improve the convictions. Thus, the White Paper remains likely to create rooms for
wrongful convictions since it disregards the fact that not all individuals brought before any court
remain guilty. England indeed has a bad history of the unfair sentence, as can be seen in the
cases of Bridgewater Four, Guildford Four, and Birmingham, among others. Some statistics
provided by many researchers indicated that the Court of Appeal quashed more than eight