miscarriage of justice

A miscarriage of justice is the conviction of a person who is innocent of the matter for which they are convicted. The concept is central to Danish legal language and covers situations where the justice system — despite its procedures and safeguards — arrives at a substantively wrong result with serious consequences for the convicted person. Historically, the concept was closely linked to wrongful capital punishment: an innocent person executed for a crime committed by someone else. In modern Danish usage, the meaning has been broadened to cover any wrongful conviction, whether the penalty is imprisonment, a fine or another sanction. What matters is not the severity of the punishment, but the error in the question of guilt itself.

A miscarriage of justice typically arises from a combination of factors: failed investigation, insufficient or misinterpreted assessment of evidence, witness statements that turn out to be unreliable, or, in extreme cases, deliberate manipulation of evidence. The system convicts the wrong person, while the guilty party remains free.

In a true crime context, the term is used about cases where there are weighty reasons to doubt an official conclusion — whether this concerns a court judgment, a police investigation that was closed with a particular perpetrator, or an official version of the course of events. It may concern a person who was never prosecuted, but who was publicly or officially identified as guilty without sufficient basis.

The concept has no independent statutory basis in Danish law, but the reopening of criminal cases — the formal mechanism for correcting a miscarriage of justice — is governed by the provisions of the Danish Administration of Justice Act (retsplejeloven) on extraordinary reopening. In Denmark, responsibility for handling such cases lies with the Special Court of Appeal (Den Særlige Klageret).