Written question asked by Earl Howe (Conservative), in the House of Lords. It was due for an answer on Wednesday, 12 January 2005. It was answered by Baroness Scotland of Asthal (Labour) on Wednesday, 12 January 2005.
Scotland of Asthal, Baroness
- Question
- Whether they consider it part of the function of the Criminal Cases Review Commission to investigate the following possibilities if brought to its attention in relation to a claim: (a) forensic evidence not presented at trial: (b) exculpatory evidence known about but not sufficiently highlighted at trial; (c) the creditability of confession evidence provided from a prison cell; (d) a mistaken direction by the trial judge; and (e) inconsistencies between evidence given at trial and evidence given at retrial [HL 599].
Secondary information
- Type
- Written question
- Reference
- HL 599; 668 c63-4WA
- Session
- 2004-05
- Subjects
- Appeals Confessions Convictions Criminal Cases Review Commission Evidence Forensic science Judges Miscarriages of justice Trials
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2013-11-24 18:15:01 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_915728
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_915728
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/Hansard/PARLIAMENTARY_QUESTION_915728