Co-Offenders before the Court: The Joinder Effect in Victoria, 1861-1961
Author(s)
Piper, Alana
Vogel, Lauren
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2018
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
It is well established in legal and psychological research that combining multiple charges against a defendant into a single trial event has a tendency to increase the chance of conviction - this is known as the joinder effect. Legal scholars have long theorised that combining the trials of multiple defendants has a similar effect, disadvantaging co-accused by tainting them with guilt by association. However, little empirical evidence has been presented to support this. It has further been suggested that the joinder of co-accused defendants became more pronounced during the twentieth century, as judges in common law jurisdictions ...
View more >It is well established in legal and psychological research that combining multiple charges against a defendant into a single trial event has a tendency to increase the chance of conviction - this is known as the joinder effect. Legal scholars have long theorised that combining the trials of multiple defendants has a similar effect, disadvantaging co-accused by tainting them with guilt by association. However, little empirical evidence has been presented to support this. It has further been suggested that the joinder of co-accused defendants became more pronounced during the twentieth century, as judges in common law jurisdictions became increasingly reluctant to increase the courts' workload by severing trials. Drawing on a sample of prosecutions data from Victoria, this article explores the impact that being co-accused had on trial outcomes and the wider legal and sociohistorical issues surrounding such joint trials.
View less >
View more >It is well established in legal and psychological research that combining multiple charges against a defendant into a single trial event has a tendency to increase the chance of conviction - this is known as the joinder effect. Legal scholars have long theorised that combining the trials of multiple defendants has a similar effect, disadvantaging co-accused by tainting them with guilt by association. However, little empirical evidence has been presented to support this. It has further been suggested that the joinder of co-accused defendants became more pronounced during the twentieth century, as judges in common law jurisdictions became increasingly reluctant to increase the courts' workload by severing trials. Drawing on a sample of prosecutions data from Victoria, this article explores the impact that being co-accused had on trial outcomes and the wider legal and sociohistorical issues surrounding such joint trials.
View less >
Journal Title
Australia and New Zealand Law and History E-Journal
Volume
5
Issue
2
Subject
Criminology
Courts and sentencing
Historical studies