To begin with, it is essential to understand the basic underlying features of the adversary system. The adversary system defines a mode of dispute resolution in which the competing claims of parties are presented by legal representatives who have interest in the outcomes of dispute, to an impartial third party, with power to impose authorities. The vital notion that the judge controls the courtroom and decides the various issues of procedure, are the components of a true adversarial system. Furthermore, other important elements include that the state law enforcement agencies do investigative work for the state, whilst the opposing parties determine themselves what evidence each of them will present to the court. Most importantly, the defendant maintains presumption of innocence and has both the right to account for himself and the also right to a jury.
             These are the most important elements that constitute the adversary system, it is now necessary to demonstrate how this system have proved at times to be ineffective
             The adversarial system's effectiveness is reflected through the conduct of trial and reliability of circumstantial evidence presented by the crown in the original trial CHAMBERLAIN V. THE QUEEN where Lyndi was Criminally convicted of the murder of her son Azaria. This was overturned in the second trial (appeal) when all evidences, both physical and expert were reproduced and most were found to be circumstantial under re-examination and cross-examination. Evidently, the absence of the baby's body, any identified weapon, lack of motive and no confession. The expert who had previously testified against the accused, also admitted he had given evidence without proper knowledge of all the attendant circumstances. The trial judge concluded that there was question mark as to weather the jury might have arrived this original verdict of the accused because they accepted the evidence that the blood was foetal, and whe...