Editorial of dossier “Wrongful convictions and prosecutions: current status, causes, correction and reparation mechanisms”
Wrongful convictions and prosecutions: an introductory overview
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v8i2.746Palavras-chave:
wrongful convictions, wrongful prosecutions, contributing factors, correction of wrongful convictions, compensation of wrongful convictions and prosecutionsResumo
This paper provides an overview of several central topics for comparative research on wrongful convictions and prosecutions (near misses). The work addresses three issues: studies that attempt to establish the quantity or frequency of errors; research that investigates the factors that increase the likelihood of their occurrence; and, finally, research on the mechanisms for correcting and compensating them. In each area, advances in available knowledge are identified, but also that we are still far from having all the information that would be required. We aim to serve as an introduction to this special issue of the RBDPP and as a starting point for those who wish to know state of the art on the subject.Downloads
Referências
BELLONI, Rank; HODGSON, Jacqueline. Criminal injustice: an evaluation of the criminal justice process in Britain. Great Britain: Palgrave, 2000.
BERNHARD, Adele. A short overview of the statutory remedies for the wrongly convicted: what works, what doesn’t and why. Public Interest Law Journal, v. 18, n., 403, pp. 403-425, 2009.
BLUME, John; HELM, Rebecca. The unexonerated: factually innocent defendants who plead guilty. Cornell Law Review, v. 100, n. 157, pp. 157-192, 2014. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2103787
BORCHARD, Edwin. Convicting the innocent: errors of criminal Justice. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1932.
BORCHARD, Edwin. European systems of state indemnity for errors of criminal justice. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, v. 3, n. 5, pp. 684-718, 1913. https://doi.org/10.2307/1132914
CAMPBELL, Kathryn. Miscarriages of justice in Canada. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2018.
CAMPBELL, Kathryn; DENOV, Myriam. The burden of innocence: coping with a wrongful imprisonment. Canadian Journal of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, v. 46, n. 2, pp. 139-163, 2004. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.46.2.139
CHALMERS, James; LEVERICK, Fiona. The Scottish Criminal Case Review Commission and its referrals to the appeal court: the first 10 years. Criminal Law Review, v. 8, pp. 608-622, 2010.
CHALMERS, James; LEVERIK, Fiona; SHAW, Alasdair (editors). Post-corroboration safeguards review report of the academic expert group. United Kingdom, 2014.
CLOW, Kimberly; LEACH, Amy; RICCIARDELLI, Rosemary. Life after wrongful convictions. In: CUTLER, Brian (ed.). Conviction of the innocent: Lessons from psychological research. Washington: American Psychological Association, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1037/13085-015
COOPER, Glinda; METERKO, Vanessa. Cognitive bias in forensic science: a systemic review. Forensic Science International, v. 297, pp. 35-46, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2019.01.016
COOPER, Sarah Lucy. Controversies in innocence cases in America. Burlington: Ashgate, 2014.
COOPER, Sarah. Innocence commissions in America: ten years after. In: COOPER, Sarah (ed.). Controversies in innocence cases in America. England: Routledge, 2014. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315574103-11
CORMACK, Tracey. The criminal case review commission. Lawtalk. n. 924, pp. 92-96, 2018.
CUTLER, Brian. Conviction of the innocent: lessons from psychological research. Washington DC: American Psychological Association, 2012.
DROR, Itiel; KUKUCKA, Jeff. Linear sequential unmasking-expanded (LSU-E): a general approach for improving decision making as well as minimizing noise and bias. Forensic Science International: Synergy, v. 3, pp. 1-5, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fsisyn.2021.100161
DROR, Itiel. Cognitive and human factors in expert decision making: six fallacies and the eight sources of bias. Analytical Chemistry, v. 92, n. 12, pp. 7988-8004, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c00704
DUCE, Mauricio. ¿Debiéramos preocuparnos de la condena de inocentes en Chile? Antecedentes comparados y locales para el debate. Revista Ius et Praxis, v. 19, n. 1, 2013, pp. 77-138, 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-00122013000100004
DUCE, Mauricio. La indemnización por condenas erróneas: una visión desde el derecho comparado. Política Criminal, v. 16, n. 31, pp. 220-253, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-33992021000100220
DUCE, Mauricio. La corrección de condenas erróneas en el ámbito comparado: análisis de algunos ejemplos para alimentar el debate en Chile. Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal, v. 8, n. 1, pp. 313-364, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v8i1.693
DUCE, Mauricio. Procedimientos abreviados y simplificados y la condena de inocentes en Chile: algunas propuestas para prevenir y minimizar los riesgos. In: VELÁSQUEZ, Javier; FERNÁNDEZ, Alejandro (Eds.). Temas actuales de Derecho Penal y Procesal Penal. A 20 años del inicio de la Reforma Procesal Penal. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch, 2022.
EDMOND, Gary; TANGEN, Jason; SEARTSON, Rachel; DROR, Itiel. Contextual and cross-contamination in the forensic sciences: the corrosive implications for investigations, plea bargains, trials and appeals. Law, Probability and Risks, v. 14, n. 1, pp. 1-25, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/lpr/mgu018
EDMOND, Gary. Forensic science evidence, adversarial criminal proceedings, and mainstream scientific advice. In: BROWN, Darryl; TURNER, Jenia; WEISSER, Bettina. The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190659837.013.39
ELKS, Laurie. Righting miscarriages of justice? ten years of criminal case review commission. London: Justice, 2008.
FABRICANT, Chris. Junk science and the criminal justice system. Brooklyn: Akashic Books, 2022.
FINDLEY, Keith; SCOTT, Michael. The Multiple Dimensions of Tunnel Vision in Criminal Cases. Wisconsin Law Review, Madison, v. 2, n. 291, pp. 291-397, 2006.
FINDLEY, Keith. Defining innocence. Albany Law Review, v. 74, n. 3, pp. 1157-1208, 2011.
FINDLEY, Keith. Adversarial inquisitions: rethinking the search for the truth. New York Law School Law, v. 56, n. 3, pp. 911-941, 2012.
FINDLEY, Keith; GOLDEN, Lawrence. The Innocence Movement, the Innocence Network, and Policy Reform. In: ZALMAN, Marvin; CARRANO, Julia (eds.). Wrongful Conviction and Criminal Justice Reform: Making Justice (United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis/Routledge Press, 2013).
FINDLEY, Keith. Innocence Found: The New Revolution in American Criminal Justice. In: COOPER, Sarah (ed.). Controversies in Innocence Cases in America (London: Ashgate Publishing Ltd., 2014). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315574103
FINDLEY, Keith. Reducing Error in the Criminal Justice System. Seton Hall Law Review, v. 48, n. 4, pp. 1265-1318, 2018.
FINDLEY, Keith. The absence of misuse of statistics in forensic science as a contributor to wrongful convictions: from patter matching to medical opinions about child abuse. Dickinson Law Review, v. 125, n. 3, 2021, pp. 615-652, 2021
FINDLEY, Keith; ANGULO, Maria Camila Angulo; HATCH, Gibson; SMITH, John. Plea bargaining in the shadow of a retrial: bargaining away innocence. Wisconsin Law Review, Madison, v. 2022, n. 3, pp. 533-618, 2022.
FORST, Brian. Wrongful convictions in a world of miscarriages of justice. In: HUFF, Ronald.; KILLIAS, Martin (eds.). Wrongful convictions & miscarriages of justice. New York: Routledge, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203597286
FPT HEADS OF PROSECUTIONS COMMITTEE. Report on the preventing of miscarriages of justice. Canada, 2004.
FPT HEADS OF PROSECUTIONS COMMITTE. The path to justice: preventing wrongful convictions. Canada, 2011.
GARRETT, Brandon; NEUFELD, Peter. Invalid Forensic Testimony and Wrongful Convictions. Virginia Law Review, v. 95, n. 1, pp. 1-97, 2009.
GARRETT, Brandon. Autopsy of a crime lab: exposing the flaws in forensic. Oakland: University of California Press, 2021.
GARRETT, Brandon. Convicting the innocent. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2011.
GIANELLI, Paul. Independent crime laboratories: the problem of motivational and cognitive bias. Utah Law Review, n. 2, pp. 247-266, 2010.
GILLIÉRON, Gladys. Comparing plea bargaining and abbreviated trial procedures. In: BROWN, Darryl; TURNER, Jenia; WEISSER, Bettina. The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190659837.013.37
GIURIATI, Domenico. Errores judiciales: diagnosis y remedios. Santiago: Ediciones Olejnik, 2018.
GOULD, Jon; CARRANO, Julia, LEO, Richard; HAIL-JARES, Katie. Predicting erroneous convictions. Iowa Law Review, v. 99, n. 471, pp. 471-522, 2014.
GOULD; Jon; LEO, Richard. One hundred years later: wrongful convictions after a century of research. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, v. 100, n. 3, pp. 825-868, 2010.
GRIFFITS, Elizabeth; OWENS, Michael. Remedying wrongful convictions: societal obligations to exonerees. In: REDLICH, Allison; ACKER, James; NORRIS, Robert; BONVENTRE, Catherine (eds.). Examining Wrongful convictions. Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 2014.
GROSS, Samuel, O´BRIEN, Barbara; HU, Chen; KENNEDY, Edward. Rate of false convictions of criminal defendants who are sentenced to death. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, v. 11, n. 20, pp. 7230-7235, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1306417111
GROSS, Samuel. Convicting the innocent. Annual Review of Law and Social Science, v. 4, pp. 173-192, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.4.110707.172300
GROSS, Samuel. Errors in misdemeanor adjudications. Boston University Law Review, v. 98, pp. 999-1011, 2018.
GROSS, Samuel. How many false convictions are there? How many exonerations are there? In: HUFF, Ronald; KILLIAS, Martin (eds.). Wrongful convictions & miscarriages of justice. New York: Routledge, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203597286
GROUNDS, Adrian. Psychological consequences of wrongful convictions and imprisonment. Canadian Journal of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, v. 46, n. 2, pp. 165-182, 2004. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.46.2.165
GUERRA THOMPSON, Sandra. Cops in lab coats. Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 2015.
GUTMAN, Jeffrey; SUN, Lingxiao. Why is Mississippi the best State in which to be exonerated? An empirical evaluation of State statutory and civil compensation for the wrongfully convicted. Northeastern University Law Review, v. 11, n. 2, pp. 694-789, 2019.
GUTMAN, Jeffrey. An empirical reexamination of State statutory compensation for the wrongly convicted. Missouri Law Review, v. 82, n. 2, pp. 369-440, 2017
HIRSHBERG, Max. La sentencia errónea en el proceso penal. Buenos Aires: Ediciones Jurídicas Europa-América, 1969.
HODGSON, Jacqueline. The metamorphosis of criminal justice: a comparative account. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.
HOLLWAY, John. Conviction integrity units: a national perspective. United States of America: University of Pennsylvania Law School, 2016.
HOYLE, Carolyn; SATO, Mai. Reasons to doubt: Wrongful convictions and the criminal case review commission. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198794578.003.0001
HUFF, Ronald.; KILLIAS, Martin (editors). Wrongful convictions & miscarriages of justice. New York: Routledge, 2013.
HUFF, Ronald.; KILLIAS, Martin (editors). Wrongful convictions: international perspectives in miscarriages of justice. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010,
JIAHONG, He. Back from the dead: wrongful convictions and criminal justice in China. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2016.
KASSIN, Saul; DROR, Itiel; KUKUCKA, Jeff. The forensic confirmation bias: problems, perspectives, and proposed solutions. Journal of Applied Research in Memory and Cognition, v. 2, n. 1, pp. 42-52, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jarmac.2013.01.001
KILLIAS, Martin. Errors occur everywhere-but not at the same frequency. In: HUFF, Ronald; KILLIAS, Martin Killias (Eds.), Wrongful convictions and miscarriages of justice: Causes and Remedies in North American and European Criminal Justice Systems. London: Routledge, 2013. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203597286
KILLIAS, Martin. Wrongful convictions in Switzerland. In: HUFF, Ronald Huff; KILLIAS, Martin (eds.). Wrongful convictions: international perspectives on miscarriages of justice. Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 2010 https://doi.org/10.1177/02685809100250021003
KING, John. Beyond ´life and liberty`: the evolving right to counsel. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, v. 48, pp. 1-49, 2013.
KIRBY, Michael. A new right of appeal as a response of wrongful convictions: it is enough?, Criminal Law Journal. n. 43, pp. 299-305, 2019
LEO, Richard, GOULD, Jon. Studying wrongful convictions: learning from social sciences. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, v. 7, n. 7, pp. 7-30, 2009.
LEO, Richard. Has the innocent movement become an exoneration movement? The risks and rewards of redefining innocence. In: MEDWED, Daniel (editor). Wrongful convictions and the DNA revolution. Twenty-Five Years of Freeing the Innocent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316417119.005
LOEFFLER, Charles; HYATT, Jordan; RIDGEWAY, Greg. Measuring self-reported wrongful convictions among prisoners. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, v. 35, pp. 259-286, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-018-9381-1
LUPARIA, Luca (Ed.) L´Errore Giudiziario. Milano: Giufree Francis Lefebvre, 2021.
LUPARIA, Luca; GRECO, Chiara. Unveiling wrongful convictions between U.S. and Italy: cross-learning from each other mistakes. Wrongful Convictions Law Review, v. 1, n. 1, pp. 101-123, 2020. https://doi.org/10.29173/wclawr12
LUPARIA, Luca; PITTIRUTI, Marco. Post-conviction remedies in the Italian criminal justice system. Erasmus Law Review, v. 13, n. 4, pp. 63-72, 2020. https://doi.org/10.5553/elr.000185
MCLELLAN, Myles. Compensation for wrongful convictions in Canada. Ottawa: Eliva Press, 2021.
METERKO, Vanessa; COOPER, Glinda. Cognitive bias in criminal case evaluation. Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology, v. 37, 101-122, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11896-020-09425-8
MOSTAGHEL, Deborah. Wrongfully incarcerated, randomly compensated-how to fund wrongful conviction compensation statutes. Indiana Law Review, v. 44, n. 503, pp. 503-544, 2011.
MUMMA, Christine. The North Carolina innocence inquiry commission: catching cases that falls through the cracks. In: ZALMAN, Marvin; CARRANO, Julia (eds.). Wrongful convictions and criminal justice reform. New York: Routledge, 2014.
NAN, Joost; LESTRADE, Sjarai. Towards a European right to claim innocence? European Papers. v. 5, n. 3, pp. 1325-1340, 2020.
NATAPOFF, Alexandra. Misdemeanors. Southern California Law Review, v. 85, n. 1313, pp. 1313-1376, 2012.
NATAPOFF, Alexandra. Punishment without crime. New York: Basic Books, 2018.
NATIONAL REGISTRY OF EXONERATIONS. Annual Report. United States of America, 2020.
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL. Strengthening forensic science in the United States: a path forward. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press, 2009.
NAUGHTON, Michael. The innocence & the criminal justice system: a sociological analysis of miscarriage of justice. United Kingdom: Palgrave McMillan, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azv004
NOBLES, Richard; SCHIFF, David. After ten years: an investment in justice. In: NAUGTHON, Michel (ed.). The Criminal Case Review Commission: hope for the innocents?. United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230245266_11
NORRIS, Robert; BONVENTRE, Catherine; ACKER, James. When justice fails. United States: Carolina Academic Press, 2018.
NORRIS, Robert. Assessing compensation statutes from the wrongly convicted. Criminal Justice Policy Review, v. 23, n. 3, 352-374, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403411409916
NORRIS, Robert. Exonerated. New York: New York University Press, 2019
OUBIÑA, Sabela. Artículo 121. In: CAZORLA, Luis María; PALOMAR, Alberto. Comentarios a la Constitución Española de 1978. Madrid: Thomson Reuters Aranzandi, 2018.
PRESIDENT’S COUNCIL OF ADVISORS ON SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY (PCAST). Forensic science in criminal courts: ensuring scientific validity and feature comparison methods. Washington D.C, 2016.
REDLICH, Allison; ACKER, James; NORRIS; Robert; BONVENTRE, Catherine. Examining wrongful convictions: stepping back, moving forward. Durham: Carolina Academic Pres, 2014.
RISINGER, Michael. Innocent Convicted: An Empirically Justified Wrongful Conviction Rate. The Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, v. 97, n. 3, pp. 761-806, 2007. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.931454
ROACH, Kent. Exceptional procedures to correct miscarriages of justice in Common Law systems. In: BROWN, Darryl; TURNER, Jenia; WEISSER, Bettina (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Criminal Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190659837.013.48
ROACH, Kent. Wrongful Convictions: Adversarial and Inquisitorial Themes. North Carolina Journal of International Law and Commercial Regulation. Chapel Hill, v. 35, n. 2, pp. 387-446, 2010.
ROBERTS, Stephanie. Post-conviction procedure: the next frontier in innocence reform. In: MEDWED, Daniel. Wrongful convictions and the DNA revolution: twenty-five years of freeing the innocent. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316417119.014
RUIZ DE VALBUENA, Irene. La justicia reduce su factura por errores judiciales. In: Cinco Días, El País Economía, 2017. Available at: https://cincodias.elpais.com/cincodias/2017/10/27/legal/1509097046_653926.html.
SCHECK, Barry. Conviction integrity units revisited. Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, Columbus, v. 14, n. 2, pp. 705-753, 2017.
SIMON, Dan. In doubt: the psychology of the criminal justice process. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2012.
STRIDBECK, Ulf; MAGNUSSEN, Philos Svein. Prevention of wrongful convictions: Norwegian criminal safeguards and the criminal case review commission. University of Cincinnati Law Review, Cincinnati, v. 80, n. 4, pp. 1373-1390, 2013.
THE WESTMINSTER COMMISSION ON MISCARRIAGES OF JUSTICE. In the interest of justice: an inquiry into the Criminal Case Review Commission. United Kingdom, 2021.
THOMAS, Sabra. Addressing Wrongful Convictions: An Examination of Texas’s New Junk Science Writ and other Measures for Protecting the Innocent. Houston Law Review, Houston, v. 2015, n. 52, pp. 1037-1065, 2015.
TURVEY, Brent; COOLEY, Craig. Miscarriages of justice: actual innocence, forensic evidence and the law. United States: Academic Press, 2014.
WEATHERED, Lynne. Wrongful convictions in Australia. University of Cincinnati Law Review, Cincinnati, v. 80, n. 4, pp. 1398-1400, 2013.
ZALMAN, Marvin; CARRANO, Julia (eds.). Wrongful Conviction and Criminal Justice Reform: Making Justice. United Kingdom: Taylor & Francis/Routledge Press, 2013.
Downloads
Publicado
Edição
Seção
Licença
Copyright (c) 2022 Mauricio Duce, Keith A. Findley
Este trabalho está licenciado sob uma licença Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os direitos autorais dos artigos publicados são do autor, com direitos do periódico sobre a primeira publicação, impressa e/ou digital.
Os autores somente poderão utilizar os mesmos resultados em outras publicações indicando claramente este periódico como o meio da publicação original. Se não houver tal indicação, considerar-se-á situação de auto-plágio.
- Portanto, a reprodução, total ou parcial, dos artigos aqui publicados fica sujeita à expressa menção da procedência de sua publicação neste periódico, citando-se o volume e o número dessa publicação, além do link DOI para referência cruzada. Para efeitos legais, deve ser consignada a fonte de publicação original.
Por se tratar de periódico de acesso aberto, permite-se o uso gratuito dos artigos em aplicações educacionais e científicas desde que citada a fonte, conforme a licença da Creative Commons.
A partir de 2022, os artigos publicados na RDPP estão licenciados com uma Licença Creative Commons Atribuição 4.0 Internacional. Os artigos puliicados até 2021 adotaram a Licença Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional.
---------------
Arquivamento e distribuição
Permite-se sem restrições o arquivamento do PDF final publicado, em qualquer servidor de acesso aberto, indexador, repositório ou site pessoal, como Academia.edu e ResearchGate.
Como Citar
