Research Paper on:
Changing the Scottish Evidence Rules

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
this Form of Evidence We, the undersigned, declare that. The current rules that relate to the use of orality as a form of evidence underline the purpose of the court  system. The usual role of the court system is determine the truth. The rules of evidence have been designed to support this goal. The argument is that the emphasis on  orality should be reduced, and increase use of written witness statements should be allowed, increasing efficiency and expediency whilst adding to accuracy of cases. This should be undertaken with an  independent third party who may be seen as a party more resembling an inquisitor, as may be found in the inquisitorial system. The way oral evidence is given should also  be more flexible in the interests of truth, such as the ability of witnesses to read from notes made at the time of the incident to refresh their memory where  appropriate. These are proposed to increase the accuracy of trials and help prevent miscarriages of justice. The current system of the adversarial  approach embodies the separation of the powers and seeks to ensure both parties, the prosecution and the defence, to an action may be heard. The opposite to this is an  inquisition system, where there are not different sides, but the aim of finding the truth. Although this has many advantages, the system is such that the cultural change would be  too great on a court system that is slow to change. This would also mean that the role of the judges would change form that of independent arbiters, impatience and  guiding the juries on the law., to inquisitors and active participants. This is seen as unreasonable in partial terms. However, it is with this model in mind that the way