Criminal Law and Expert Evidence

6 EC

Semester 2, period 5

5274CLEE6Y

Owner Master Forensic Science
Coordinator mr. C. Ganzeboom
Part of Master Forensic Science, year 1

Course manual 2022/2023

Course content

The purpose of this course is to demonstrate the objectives and effects of criminal law, the position of experts in different stages of the criminal process and the use of expert evidence. The peculiarities of the communication between experts and non-experts in court will be addressed. Because students will not have a background in law and be of different nationalities, the course will not focus on any particular legal system, but instead take a more general perspective. The different aspects of a fair trial as is guaranteed in the European Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights will serve as a framework for discussing the role of forensic experts and their contribution towards judicial fact-finding. Besides gaining knowledge of criminal law and criminal procedure, the course aims to make students aware of the difficulties regarding the communication between forensic experts and legal professionals. 

Study materials

Literature

  • Week 1

    Theme: Introduction to foundations of criminal law

    Topics:

    • Theories of punishment
    • Principles of Criminalisation and the Limits of Criminal Law

    Required reading:

    Keiler and  D.  Roef, Comparative  concepts  of  Criminal  Law,  Cambridge-Antwerp-Portland, Intersentia, 2019 3rd edition, pp 1-84

     

    Week 2

    Theme: The criminal act

    Topics:

    • The Principle of Legality
    • The Elements of Crime – Actus rea and mens rea
    • Forms and aspects of mens rea

    Required reading:

    Keiler and  D.  Roef, Comparative  concepts  of  Criminal  Law,  Cambridge-Antwerp-Portland, Intersentia, 2019 3rd edition, pp 85-105, 107-120, 177-205



    Week 3

    Theme: Justifications and excuses 

    Topics:

    • Causation
    • Justifications and excuses

    Required reading

    Keiler and  D.  Roef, Comparative  concepts  of  Criminal  Law,  Cambridge-Antwerp-Portland, Intersentia, 2019 3rd edition, pp 153-175 and 207-251

     

    Week 4

    Guest lecture Rosanne de Roo, forensic advisor court of appeals (Arnhem-Leeuwarden)

     

    Week 5

    Theme: inchoate liability and introduction to criminal procedure

    Topics:

    • Attempt and preparation
    • Criminal procedure: principle of legality and sword and shield function

    Required reading:

    Keiler and  D.  Roef, Comparative  concepts  of  Criminal  Law,  Cambridge-Antwerp-Portland, Intersentia, 2019 3rd edition, pp 253-284

     

    Additional literature to be announced.

     

    Week 6

    Topics and literature to be announced.

     

    Week 7

    Topics and literature to be announced.

Objectives

  • 1. demonstrate knowledge of the fundamental principles of criminal law (i.e. theories of punishment, legality and criminalisation) and assess those principles when answering (case-based) questions.
  • 2. evaluate the following fundamental concepts of substantive criminal law: the elements of crime (actus reus and mens rea) and forms of mens rea (intent, recklessness and negligence), while taking into account the similarities and differences between different legal systems.
  • 3. evaluate the fundamental concepts of attempt, preparation and circumstances excluding criminal liability, while taking into account the similarities and differences between different legal systems.
  • 4. critically assess the accusatorial vs. inquisitorial (or common law vs civil law) dichotomy and its influence on criminal procedure and judicial fact finding.
  • 5. assess the influence of the right to a fair trial (article 6 ECHR) on the evidential principles in the member states.
  • 6. critically evaluate the role of the forensic expert and forensic advisor in criminal proceedings and their contribution to judicial fact finding.
  • 7. create a written information supplement to communicate their scientific findings to members of the criminal justice system in an understandable manner.

Teaching methods

    Lectures

    Learning activities

    Activity

    Hours

    Tentamen

    3

    Werkcollege

    14

    Self study

    151

    Total

    168

    (6 EC x 28 uur)

    Attendance

    This programme does not have requirements concerning attendance (OER part B).

    Additional requirements for this course:

    There is no compulsory attendance required. However, it is highly recommended to follow the lectures. Experience from previous years taught us students who did not attend the lectures, failed to achieve high results on the exam.

    Assessment

    Item and weight Details

    Final grade

    8 (80%)

    Exam 80%

    		Must be ≥ 5.5, Mandatory

    2 (20%)

    Written assignment (information supplement)

    		Must be ≥ 5.5, Mandatory

    1 (5%)

    Context (Weight 1)

    2 (11%)

    Method & Results (Weight 2)

    2 (11%)

    Statistics (Weight 2)

    3 (16%)

    Target Audience (Weight 3)

    2 (11%)

    Structure (Weight 2)

    2 (11%)

    Academic Writing (Weight 2)

    2 (11%)

    References (Weight 2)

    3 (16%)

    Focus (Weight 3)

    2 (11%)

    Critical Thinking (Weight 2)

    All components will be graded on a scale from 1 to 10, with a maximum of one decimal after the point. These grades are used to calculate the final grade. In order to pass the course, all components and the final grade have to be sufficient, i.e. at least a five and a half. When a student has not fulfilled this requirement, the examiner will register the mark ‘did not fulfil all requirements’ (NAV) whether or not the averaged grade is sufficient.

    The components will be weighted as follows:

    1. Written assignment: information supplement of a forensic expert report (20%)
    2. Exchange with law students (0%)
    3. Written exam (80%)

    Examination consists of a written assignment in which an expert report is explained in such a way that lawyers can grasp the meaning of the report and a written exam at the end of the course. 

    The final grade will be announced at the latest on June 23th (= 15 working days after the final course activity). Between June 23th 2020 to July 21th (=35 working days after the final course activity) a post-exam discussion or inspection moment will be planned. This will be announced on Canvas and/or via email.

    LO Tested in component EQ 1 EQ 2 EQ 3 EQ 4 EQ 5 EQ 6 EQ 7 EQ 8 EQ 9 EQ 10
    1 3 x                  
    2 3 x                  
    3 3 x                  
    4 3             x      
    5 3 x                  
    6 1, 2, 3             x      
    7 1, 2                 x  

    Table of specification: the relation between the Learning Outcomes (LO) of the course, the assessment components of the course and the Exit Qualifications (EQ) of the Master’s Forensic Science (described in the Introduction in the Course Catalogue)

    Assignments

    Component 1: Written Assignment - Expert Report (20% of final grade)
    Expert reports can be quite short and lacking of background information. The Netherlands Forensic Institute provides information supplements with general information about forensic topics. In these supplements they explain which methods are used and give general background information on that particular forensic field. Students are asked to write such an information supplement on a specific topic that is provided to you. This is an individual assignment. The target audience are members from the judiciary.


    Chain of Evidence
    You are asked to write an information supplement on either DNA or glass, however, in each group of the course Chain of Evidence, one student needs to write a report on DNA and one on glass. After handing in your written assignment you are asked to choose one DNA report and one glass report that will be attached to your expert report in Chain of Evidence. This will contribute to the preparation of the non-scientists present during the moot court.

    Component 2:        Exchange with Law students (not graded)
    In week 4 an exchange with law students will take place. Further information will be provided at the beginning of the course.

    Component 3:      The final examination (80% of the final grade)
    The exam of this course will be a written examination based on the content covered during the lessons. The final exam will be assessed on an individual basis.

     

    Fraud and plagiarism

    The 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' applies to this course. This will be monitored carefully. Upon suspicion of fraud or plagiarism the Examinations Board of the programme will be informed. For the 'Regulations governing fraud and plagiarism for UvA students' see: www.student.uva.nl

    Course structure

    In order to give some guidance in reading the compulsory literature and preparing the weekly lectures weekly learning outcomes have been formulated.

    Week 1

    • Describe the different theories of punishment and having regard to these theories, assess whether a certain form of punishment is desirable or can be explained;
    • Explain and classify the different principles of criminalisation and make arguments against or in favour of criminalisation of a given conduct;
    • Assess the criminalisation of certain criminal behaviour while taking into account the principles of criminalisation.

    Week 2

    • Understand the meaning of the principle of legality and reason why its meaning differs in the distinct legal systems;
    • Recognize the different aspects of the principle of legality and methods of legal interpretation;
    • Analyse the influence of the European Convention of Human Rights on the meaning of the principle of legality in distinct legal systems that are subject to the convention;
    • Understand the different elements of crime and how we determine their presence in criminal cases;
    • Evaluate whether a certain approach to mens rea (in a certain legal system), generates a different outcome in a criminal case.

    Week 3

    • Understand what justifications and excuses (and their criteria) are and recognize them when presented in a case (limited to the justifications and excuses that are covered by the literature);
    • Explain the connection between the elements of crime and justifications and excuses;
    • Understand the difference in perspective with regard to defences between the German and Dutch continental law systems on one hand and the English common law system on the other;
    • Evaluate whether the previous mentioned difference in perspective, could generate a different outcome in a specific criminal case;

    Week 4

    Exchange with law students and guest lecture Laura Kieftenbeld (3 hrs)

    Week 5

    • Understand the nature and rationale of inchoate offences;
    • Describe the different approaches of the Dutch, German and English system with regard to the actus reus and mens rea of inchoate offences;
    • Discuss the problems that arise with regard to the actus reus and mens rea of inchoate offences (keeping in mind the beforementioned nature);
    • Explain the meaning of the procedural principle of legality and sword and shield function of criminal procedural law.

    Week 6

    • Understand the meaning of the right to a fair trial and explain which several fair trial rights it entails;
    • Assess in a specific case whether a violation of article 6 ECHR arises with regard to the examination of witnesses;
    • Explain the main characteristics of and differences between an inquisitorial criminal law system and an adversarial/accusatorial criminal law system;
    • Explain how the difference between a court-appointed expert and a partisan expert asks for a different set of fair trial rights as laid down in article 6 ECHR;
    • Explain the goal of the NRCE and demonstrate knowledge of the NRCE.

    Week 7

    • Describe the way the Dutch judge responds to unreliable evidence and illegally gathered evidence;
    • Describe the possible consequences of a breach of procedural rules during the preliminary investigation;
    • Explain in which case a certain consequence/response can be expected.



      Dates, times and room numbers can be found in Datanose. In addition to the weekly lecture three guest lectures on cybercrime are offered, which take place at the law faculty on Roeterseiland. Further information will be announced through Canvas.

       

      Course week

      Activity

      participants

      Lecturer

      Subject

      Literature

      1

      Lecture

      all students

      C. Ganzeboom

      Introduction to criminal law

       

      Keiler and Roef 2019

      2

      Lecture

      all students

      C. Ganzeboom

      The criminal act

       

      Keiler and Roef 2019

      3

      Lecture

      all students

      C. Ganzeboom

      Justifications and excuses and inchoate offences

      Keiler and Roef 2019

      4

      Practical assignment

      all students

      Guest Lecture

      Practical assignment

       

      5

      Lecture

      all students

      C. Ganzeboom

      Criminal procedure; criminal investigation, the right to a fair trial

      See url’s on Canvas

      6

      Lecture

      all students

      C. Ganzeboom

      Criminal procedure; code of conduct

       

      See url’s on Canvas

      7

      Lecture

      all students

      C. Ganzeboom

      Criminal procedure; law of evidence

       

      See url’s on Canvas

       

       

    Timetable

    The schedule for this course is published on DataNose.

    Last year's student feedback

    In order to provide students some insight how we use the feedback of student evaluations to enhance the quality of education, we decided to include the table below in all course guides.

    Criminal Law and Expert Evidence (6EC) N=27  
    Strengths
    • Charlotte’s enthusiasm, she was always willing to help
    • Structure of the course, it was interactive and the readings were interesting
    • Exam questions were related to the topics
    		 Notes for improvement
    • No guidance for the information supplement
    • The articles of the last two weeks were too hard to understand.
    • Lack of lectures/tutorials

    Response lecturer:

    • There are also English information supplements available online. In addition, perhaps the Dutch students could have shared this information with international students? As it in principal only concerns the set-up and headings. The reason we do not offer a ready-made template is that this takes away part of the analytical challenge of the assignment. How can you best structure such a document to able to clearly and in understandable terms explain forensic technology and interpretation to a judiciary audience?
    • The articles in week 6 and 7 concern rather complex subject matter about expert evidence (bewijsrecht). The teacher recognizes this is very hard for MFS students as even master law students struggle with this. This part will be adjusted.
    • The advice to start with a lecture, then read and then do discussions sounds like a very classical set-up where during the first lecture students sit back to consume the information told by the lecturer. The coordinator will look into methods for students to self-prepare so the offered contact moment can still be interactive and even more in-depth.

    Contact information

    Coordinator

    • mr. C. Ganzeboom