When is Fresh Evidence Fresh and True? The treatment of scientific expert evidence and experts in the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) of England and
Wales
The English Court of Appeal retains considerable discretion over what expert evidence submitted in support of appeals against conviction it is prepared to hear, as well whether it judges such evidence to be true, and even over what constitutes an expert. As a result, the relationship between experts and the Court, and the status of their evidence in proceedings appears to be unstable and unpredictable. If experts wish to have their evidence received in a manner which contributes appropriately to the assessment which the Court must make of the safety of any conviction it considers, they must be aware of how their contribution should fit the needs of the court when it assesses the evidence in the case under consideration, and in particular whether their evidence can qualify as 'fresh' in the way that the court itself defines this term.
Dr Andrew Green was educated at Oxford and Keele and holds a doctorate in criminology from the latter. He became interested in criminal justice following his move to Sheffield in 1989 and in 1993 he founded the organisation INNOCENT. INNOCENT assists people who claim to have been convicted of crimes they did not commit, and their families and supporters, who are its members, and it continues to meet regularly. In 2001 he became a founder of United Against Injustice. In 2012 he was invited by Professor Claire McGourlay to assist with the Innocence Project at the University of Sheffield School of Law. The project has now become the Miscarriages of Justice Review Centre and Andrew holds the post of Lecturer in Clinical Legal Education.