The effectiveness of the criminal trial process as a means of achieving justice The criminal trial process aims to provide justice for all those involved, while it succeeds in the majority of cases, it effectiveness is influenced and reduced by certain factors. These include the legal representation involved in a case and the availability of legal aid, the capacity of the jury assessing the trial, the credibility of scientific evidence and the impact of social media on the trial process. Due to such flaws the criminal trial process is not always an effective means of achieving justice. There is often unfair advantages in the trial process as not all members of society have the same access to legal representatives or availability of legal aid. Legal aid is a great way for the accused to gain access to the law, however depending on the funding of the government, resource efficiency could be affected. The criminal justice system is based on an adversarial system of the law and while supporters of this system say it’s fair because both sides have the opportunity to present their case, the outcome is based on the strongest case presented. However, the effectiveness of this process in providing just outcomes is compromised, as in many cases the competing sides are not equal before the law, with potential imbalances in resources, skills or knowledge. Not everyone has the finances to seek proper legal representation, which can result to injustice in the courtroom or during the criminal trial process. As a result in 1979, the Legal Aid Commission was established by the state government. It was created to give access to proper legal representation for marginalised and disadvantaged groups, and to have equitable access before the law for all groups of society. Dietrich v The Queen 1992 in the High Court established the right to a fair trial in consideration to the accused not being able to afford legal representation. The effectiveness of the process can also be flawed...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document