Wrongful Conviction in Australia - Criminology Assignment

Internal Code: MAS5801

Criminology Assignment:

Wrongful convictions are one of the issues which have raised global concern and striking attention from many legal scholars in recent years (Garett 2011; Garrett 2008; Risinger 2007; Roach2009). Of the concerns of wrongful convictions is the little knowledge and evidence about the root causes in Australia. To date, most of research on the issue has focused on errors such as investigator misconduct, false confessions and witness misidentification, with very little attention to role of race and class in leading these errors (Langdon& Wilson, 2005). Therefore, research on this matter is important in identifying root causes leading to this error and the likelihoods of potential marginalised groups such as Aboriginal who may be vulnerable to wrongful convictions. Looking back into the Australian history, there have been striking cases of exonerations which have proved an association between race and overrepresentations in the criminal justice system. For example the cases of Kelvin Condren, Max Stuart, and Frank button indicate that Australian Aboriginals suffer from a propensity for miscarriage of justice (MacFarlane&Stratton, 2016). In addition Aboriginals overrepresentations in prisons further verify this propensity. According to data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, (2011, 2013) aboriginals makeup one quarter of the prison populations. Moreover, they are more likely to become in contact with law enforcement officers and held in custody (Anthony and Blagg 2012; Blagg 2008; Cunneen 2001). This has also led to a public perception of criminality by the minority groups and public support for though and punitive policies to control offending (Ghandoosh, 2014). Questions: How do these documents frame the issue? Where are they sourcing their information? Is it qualitative/quantitative, local/international, rigorous/opinion? What are they advocating for their findings? How do they frame a solution? What impacts does this framing have on responses to the issue? How might it shape policy or public opinion? How might this have a positive/negative impact? How might these reports be improved? What would you recommend to improve/enhance/change research focus?