Ryan Ronald’s Conviction Case Study
Ryan Ronald’s conviction is well known due to the effects that it impacted on the legal system. After its occurrence, the Australian government realized the need to alter how convictions are passed to defendants. The conviction of Ronald Ryan was primarily based on the evidence that had been presented, and the assumption that Ryan had committed had committed a crime. The suspicions were cemented by the fact that he had several altercations with the law through the course of his life up to the point when the major crime was committed within the premises of a law correction facility.
Overview of the Case
On 19th of December, 1965, Ryan made an attempt to escape from the correctional facility in which he had been jailed. In the process, George Hodgson was shot on the chest and he died immediately. Numerous witnesses came to the stage and confessed to the fact that they saw Ryan commit the crime. The jury was convinced that the convict had actually committed the crime and sentenced him to death by hanging, an event which took place in February 1967.
There existed a widespread uncertainty about the fact that Ryan had actually committed the crime since the evidence that was presented showed that two other prison guards had fired their guns at the same time when George Hodgson was shot (“‘Ronald Ryan did not kill warder'”, 2018). The only person who knew the truth about the entire escaped attempt was the late Ryan’s inmate, Walker, who had tried to escape with Ryan from the correctional facility when the murder was committed. Bringing Walker on stage so that he could attest in favor of Ryan was not possible since he was considered to be an accomplice in the crime. When Walker was released in 2007, he confessed to the fact that Ryan could have never shot the guard since when they were trying to escape, the gun that Ryan had acquired was jammed, and Ryan did not fire from it at any moment.
Nature of Evidence Presented
In Ryan’s case, identification and confession evidence was employed to convict him of the purported crime. The confession evidence was based on Ryan’s own words where he said: “yes I shot, but it was only to stop”. In this case, Ryan did not specify that he had shot the guard, but the jury assumed it is the bullet from his gun that must have killed George Hodgson. The identification evidence was presented by the guards who were stationed on the wall. They all confessed to having seen Ryan shoot the guard.
The statements of the identification witnesses contradicted the forensic evidence since according to the later; the bullet that killed George Hudson penetrated his chest at an angle that could be traced back from the prison wall. Forensic evidence was further supported by the confessions of two guards who claimed that they had fired severally at the escapees while the George was chasing them (“‘Ronald Ryan did not kill warder'”, 2018). However, one of the guards who confessed to having fired his gun at that moment had a magazine that was full even after the event. On the other hand, Ryan’s gun was missing a bullet, and therefore, the guard’s confession was scrapped as it appeared to be invalid.
Walker’s conviction proved that a serious miscarriage of the law had been committed. The situation was probably caused by the fact that since an officer of the law had been murdered, the jury was bloodthirsty, and someone had to pay for the crime. Despite Ryan’s pleas that he had not shot the victim, the Jury did not pause to consider all sides of the matter and demand that in-depth investigations be carried out. As a result, the wrong person ended up being convicted. I believe that more time should have been provided for the case to progress since taking a life, for another that was lost fails to impact any form of progress on the society (“‘Ronald Ryan did not kill warder'”, 2018). In future, it is essential that evidence which is presented before the Jury be considered as essential for both sides in determining the outcome of the case despite its minute nature. By doing this, it will be possible to avoid passing biased judgments.
‘Ronald Ryan did not kill warder’. (2018). Theaustralian.com.au. Retrieved 19 April 2018, from https://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/nation/ronald-ryan-did-not-kill-warder/news-s story/16688552f8598b739a26f455761be16a