Skip Navigation


Oxford Journal of Legal Studies Advance Access originally published online on August 12, 2008
Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 2009 29(1):43-70; doi:10.1093/ojls/gqn022
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
29/1/43    most recent
gqn022v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Roberts, S.
Right arrow Articles by Weathered, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

Assisting the Factually Innocent: The Contradictions and Compatibility of Innocence Projects and the Criminal Cases Review Commission

Stephanie Roberts* and Lynne Weathered**

* Director, University of Westminster Innocence Project. Email: s.roberts02{at}westminster.ac.uk
** Director, Griffith University Innocence Project. Email: l.weathered{at}griffith.edu.au


  Abstract

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) was the first publicly funded body created to investigate claims of wrongful conviction, with the power to refer cases to the Court of Appeal. In other countries, such as Australia, Canada and the United States, many regard the CCRC as the optimal solution to wrongful conviction and, for years, Innocence Projects in these countries have called for the establishment of a CCRC-style body in their own jurisdictions. However, it is now Innocence Projects which are being introduced in England and Wales to try to assist applicants who are innocent but convicted. This article reviews why the CCRC was created, discusses the role of factual innocence within this body and within the criminal justice system generally and explores why Innocence Projects are being created in England and Wales, despite the presence of the CCRC. It explains how these different organizations may work together to assist factually innocent people who have been wrongly convicted, and the role Innocence Projects may play generally in criminal justice reform and legal education.

The comments in this article do not necessarily reflect those of the Griffith Innocence Project or Innocence Networks. We are grateful to Professors Richard Nobles, David Schiff and Clive Walker for their assistance with this article. We are also grateful to the anonymous referee for very helpful and supportive comments.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.