Criminal cases review commissions and "deference" to the courts: The evaluation of evidence and evidentiary rules

Two Criminal Cases Review Commissions have recently been set up in the United Kingdom to review alleged miscarriages of justice and refer appropriate cases to the relevant Appeal Court. This article examines the problems posed for Commissions by fresh information which is either unfavourable to an applicant or is inadmissible as evidence. The arguments are developed through a series of scenarios. The conclusions are that the Commissions will have to engage in the evaluation of evidence and act upon such assessments and, further, that they should not consider themselves bound by the often highly technical rules of the law of evidence. It is also suggested that claims that the Commissions are destined to fail because of their "subordination" to the Appeal Courts are overstated.