Disadvantages of Using Juries

Question 2

Main structure for P1

Answer 2

• Point: secrecy
• Example: Young 1985
• Counter argument: secrecy of the jury room
• Example: Bushell’s Case 1670

Question 3

Main structure for P2

Answer 3

• Point: Perverse decisions
• Example: Kronlid 1996
• Counter argument: Jury equity
• Example: Ponting’s Case 1984

Question 4

Main structure for P3

Answer 4

• Point: media influence
• Example: Taylor Sisters 1993
• Counter argument: Impartiality

Question 5

Main structure for P4

Answer 5

• Point: lack of understanding
• Example: research shows doubts about 5% of jury convictions
• Counter argument: open system of justice

Question 6

Secrecy

Answer 6

• Jury does not need to give a reason for decision reached
• Makes it difficult for D appeal
• No way of knowing how the decision was reached or if the case was understood

Question 7

When was the case of young?

Answer 7

1985

Question 8

What happened in Young 1985?

Answer 8

4 jurors held seance to try contact 2 murder victims to find out who murdered them

Question 9

Counter argument of secrecy of the jury room

Answer 9

• Jurors are free from pressure in discussion
• Can ignore strict letter of the law
• Demonstrated in Bushell’s case 1670

Question 10

When was Bushell’s case?

Answer 10

1670

Question 11

What happened in Bushell’s case 1670?

Answer 11

• Jury refused to convict Quaker activists
• Fined and imprisoned
• Released after an appeal

Question 12

Perverse decisions

Answer 12

• Juries able to ignore laws they feel are unjust
• Creates uncertainty

Question 13

When was the case of Kronlid?

Answer 13

1996

Question 14

What happened in the case of Kronlid 1996?

Answer 14

Jury acquitted group of peace campaigners who caused damage to a Hawk jet fighter

Question 15

Counter argument of jury equity

Answer 15

• Jury can disagree with a particular law
• Apply their own idea of fairness
• Juries almost always reach a verdict and convict 2/3 of the time
• Ponting’s case 1984

Question 16

When was Ponting’s case?

Answer 16

1984

Question 17

What happened in Ponting’s case 1984?

Answer 17

Jury refused to convict a civil servant who had leaked information

Question 18

Media influence

Answer 18

• Difficult for juries to remain independent and free from influence
• Especially on high profile cases where there is a lot of publicity

Question 19

When was the case of the Taylor Sisters?

Answer 19

1993

Question 20

What happened in the case of the Taylor Sisters 1993?

Answer 20

Guilty convictions overturned as the sensationalist media coverage may have influenced jurors

Question 21

Counter argument of impartiality

Answer 21

• Jurors not connected with anyone involved in the case
• Random selection should represent cross-section of society
• 12 people cancel out each other’s prejudices

Question 22

Lack of understanding

Answer 22

• Lack legal qualifications
• No minimum standard for education

Question 23

Evidence for lack of understanding

Answer 23

• Research shows doubts about 5% of convictions
• Some jurors admitted having difficulty understanding cases
• Although it’s only small amount of people, is concerning when on criminal matters it’s someone’s liberty at stake

Question 24

Counter argument of open system of justice

Answer 24

• Allows the ordinary person to take part in administration of justice
• Helps citizens feel empowered
• Justice is seen to be done

Question 25

Conclusion

Answer 25

In conclusion, while there are many advantages to a jury (especially concerning an open system of justice), it can be argued that, due to the untrained nature of and the freedom given to the jury, they are a disadvantage to criminal cases