6c. Murderous Mapp: The Victorian Courts
In Victorian Britain, there was a big increase in crime. This meant that the police and the legal system had to become much more efficient to cope. There were lots of changes made to the courts and police during Victorian times. Many of the things the Victorians set up we still use today, although there are some differences.
Firstly, examine the two principles of English justice, 'presumption of innocence' and 'beyond reasonable doubt' (Opens in a new window).
Then look at the various differences below. Think about how these differences would have affected the original trial:
Difference One (Compare with Page 4, 'The jury')
| Difference: |
In Victorian times, women were not allowed to be judges, lawyers or to sit on a jury. Magistrates and judges were usually wealthy men from the upper classes. |
| How would this have affected your ability to do jury service? |
|
| Were Victorian courts 'More fair' or 'Less fair' than modern courts? |
|
Difference Two (Compare with Page 4, 'The jury')
| Difference: |
When the jury was sent out, they were kept 'without meat or drink or candle' until they reached a verdict.
In modern times a jury can take as long as they need to make a decision, although the judge may stop them if he thinks they will never reach a verdict. |
| Do you think a jury given lots of time to think would reach a fairer verdict? |
|
| Were Victorian courts 'More fair' or 'Less fair' than modern courts? |
|
Difference Three (Compare with Page 3, 'The evidence')
| Difference: |
Written evidence is known as 'hard' evidence. This is because it is something definite. Someone may lie when they write something down. However, if two people have written two different things about the same event, we know that one of those people must be lying deliberately. If two people say they were told different things by different people, they may simply have misheard what they were told.
Mapp was convicted partly through 'hearsay' evidence. This means it is something some one was told by some one else. In the trial, Richards claimed Aston had told her that Mapp had told Aston that he [Mapp] had gone straight home with Richards! One big difference between the court in Victorian times and the court now is that such evidence is not allowed in a modern court. |
| Play a game of Chinese Whispers |
Play the first game as you normally would, by speaking.
Play the second game by writing a note down and showing it to the person next to you. They must write down the same thing and pass it on.
|
| Was the written note passed around better than the spoken note? |
|
| Is written evidence more reliable than oral evidence? |
|
| Were Victorian courts 'More fair' or 'Less fair' than modern courts? |
|
Difference Four (Compare with Page 2, 'The cast')
| Difference: |
British courts use something called 'presumption of innocence'. This means that they assume some one is innocent, unless they can be proved guilty
In Victorian times, the jury were allowed to hear whether a person being accused had been arrested for any crimes before. In modern times, the jury cannot hear this. The press are also stopped from reporting things about a defendant which might make a jury think he or she is guilty, even before the trial has started.
|
| Imagine you are on a jury trying your best friend of theft. Would you be more or less likely to find him or her guilty. |
|
Imagine you are trying a boy, who is new to your school, of theft.
Would you be more likely to find him guilty if you knew he had been expelled from his previous school for theft?
|
|
| Were Victorian courts 'More fair' or 'Less fair' than modern courts? |
|
Overall, do you think a modern system is better or worse than a Victorian system?
|
