What would the Judge do contained by court if the be no witnesses for the crime?

say it was a sexual assult crime.
All kinds of other evidence can be standard such as finger prints, DNA, smell, dress etc.
In the absence of any evidence or witnesses then the valise would probably not even get to court. If the Crown Prosecution Service brings the case to court consequently you can be pretty sure that they have some good evidence.
It Would later depend on the evidence, such as DNA samples taken if there be any. But usually if there is no proof then in attendance is no crime, Flawed system if you ask me.
Listen to both peoples newspaper of the truth, what about DNA, and circumstantial evidence then?

as someone else mentioned there are to witnesses the defendant and the victim. Also near is so much other evidence that could come in to a case similar to this i.e. DNA(hair found at the scene, semen, blood, skin, swabs taken from the victim, condom if left behind), clothes, personal statements, other individuals coming forward, previous convictions that in some way could relate to this type of overnight case, any weapon used, CCTV evidence to show if the defendent was in that nouns. The list really could go on.

If within was no other witnesses that does not mean that a travel case wont go ahead.
He would do the same as in any other trial: create sure that it was fair and thorough and that adjectives the relevant evidence was made available. What he wouldn't do is decide the condemnation, that's the jury's decision.

EDIT: Sceptic, Redmonk: Firstly would you two kindly pinch it outside, you're upsetting the children. Secondly, why are trying to hold a debate on an answer site? Why not find yourselves a debating forum where you can both abuse respectively other to your hearts' content?
I regard as way to much emphasis is put on Witness statements when here is more important evidence that should be used if you want to prove someone is truly guilty.

Take for example a case I be working on, which involved a fight outside a dog track. I had 7-8 different witness statements to check through, adjectives seeing the same incident, all TOTALLY different (at one point, 1 claimed a man be picked up by two men and thrown onto a car, another claimed a man pushed him onto a car, and next the man's witness statement himself said he took a step back and tripped over a car).

So clearly, we can't put too much weight on what one personality is saying...especially if it is a sexual assault for example (where there would be one those word against the others).

There could be other evidence that could help the judge next to a trial; CCTV, poor answers by the defendant during interview, fingerprints etc.

Also, in a sexual assault case don't forget the aggrieved and the defendant are both witnesses...they'd hold differing versions of events as you would expect, but they can both put witness statements through. Source(s): work in criminal defence ruling

Related Questions: