Juries Flashcards
What is the criteria to be permanently disqualified from jury service?
If a person has ever been sentenced to life imprisonment Youth custody for 5 years or more Detained during HM pleasure Imprisonment for public protection Sentenced to an extended sentence
What is the criteria for someone being disqualified from jury service for 10 years?
At any time in the last ten years, served a term of imprisonment, had a suspended sentence, had a community order passed on them
Who is temporarily disqualified from jury service?
People on bail
Who cannot become a juror?
Someone who suffers from a mental illness, psychopathic disorder or servers mental handicap
Why may someone be discharged from jury service?
If the judge believes they have a lack of capacity for example they do not understand English or have a disability which would make them unsuitable
What has the criminal justice act 2003 done?
Abolished the category of excusal as of right and ineligibility. Now the judiciary, police and anyone involved in the criminal justice system can be jurors to introduce professionalism into the jury.
Who has the right to be excused from jury service?
Members of the armed services
How can members of the armed services be excused from jury service?
With a certificate from their commanding officer
Add card for CJA 2003
High
What is the problem with police and judges being on the jury?
They may be bias because they have a link with the case or people involved
What case is relevant to the appropriateness of judges and police officers on juries?
R v I (2007)
What is the case of R v I (2007) relevant to?
The potential problems of having judges and police officers on a jury
What happened in the case of R v I (2007)?
One juror was a police officer who knew all of the police officers giving evidence in the case. She automatically assumed the defendant, accused of dealing heroin, was guilty.
What was the outcome of R v I (2007)?
The appeal was allowed she should have been asked to stand down
What is a discretionary excusal?
When a potential juror may be excused or deferred to a later date for a good reason, this is at the discretion of the court.
What is a ‘good reason’ for a discretionary excusal?
Exam, family commitments, pre booked holiday
What’s the fine for non-attendance?
£1000
What is the criteria to be a juror?
Aged between 18-70
On the electoral register
Resident in the uk for atleast 5 years since the age of 13
Who administers the selection process?
Central juror summoning bureau
What does the central juror summoning bureau do?
Administer the selection process
Since when has the central juror summoning bureau administered the selection process?
Since 2001
What is the selection process?
The central juror summoning bureau organises the selection process by attaining a random list of potential jurors from the electoral register. A summons is sent out to more than 12 jurors
Where does the list of jurors come from?
The electoral register
How is the jury selected in court?
Jurors are divided into groups of 15 and allocated to a court
At the start of the trial the clerk selects 12 at random
What is ‘praying a talesman’?
When there are insufficient jurors the court can select anyone qualified from people passing in the street, local businesses ect
What is an example of ‘praying a talesman’?
Middlesex Crown Court in 1992 used this method after half the jurors didn’t turn up on New Year’s Day
What happened at Middlesex Crown Court in 1992?
Half the jurors didn’t turn up on New Year’s Day so ‘praying a talesman’ was used
What happened in 1992?
At Middlesex crown court half the jurors didn’t turn up on New Year’s Day so ‘praying a talesman’ was used
In what year was ‘praying a talesman’ used in Middlesex crown court?
1992
What is vetting?
When the prosecution and defence have the right to see the list of jurors
What are the two types of vetting?
Routine police checks
A wider check on the jurors background and political affiliations
Why are routine police checks carried out on jurors?
To eliminate jurors who are disqualified
What did the Attorney General’s guidelines (1998) set out about wider checks on jurors background and political affiliations?
It should only be used in cases involving national security where part of the evidence is likely to be given by camera and in terrorist cases
The Attorney General’s permission is needed to vet
What happens just before the trial starts?
The selected jurors cone into the jury box and are sworn in
What happens before the jury are sworn into the box?
The prosecution and defence have certain rights to challenge one of more of the jurors
What are the types of challenging available to the defence and prosecution?
To the array
For cause
What is to the array type of challenging?
When the whole jury can be challenged on the basis it is bias, this is set out under the juries act 1974
What does the jurors act 1974 set out?
That a while jury can be challenged on the basis is has been chosen in an unrepresentative or bias way
What act was created in 1974?
The juries act
When was the juries act created?
1974
When was the to the array type of challenging successfully used?
Against the “Romford” jury in Old Bailey 1993
What happened with the “Romford” jury in Old Bailey 1993?
To the array type of challenging was used as from a panel of 12 jurors, 9 came from Romford, 2 of which living on the same street
What happened in 1993?
To the array type of challenging was used at the Old Bailey with the “Romford” jury as from a panel of 12 jurors, 9 came from Romford, 2 of which lived on the same street
What is for the cause challenging?
When the prosecution or defence can challenge the right of an individual juror to sit. However they must have a valid reason such as a juror is disqualified or is related to the defendant or a witness
What is a valid reason for for the cause challenging to be used?
A juror is disqualified
Knows the defendant or a witness
What can happen if an inappropriate juror is not removed?
It could lead to the conviction to be quashed
What case is relevant to for the cause challenging?
R v Wilson and Sprason (1995)
What is the case of R v Wilson and Sprason (1995) relevant to?
For the cause challenging
What year was the case of R v Wilson and Sprason?
1995
What case happened in 1995?
R v Wilson and Sprason (1995)
What happened in the case of R v Wilson and Sprason (1995)?
The wife of a prison officer was summoned for jury service and asked to be excused from the stand as the defendants were on remand where her husband worked. This was rejected and she served.
What was the outcome of R v Wilson and Sprason (1995)?
The court of appeal said justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done and her presence on the jury prevented that. The defendants convictions were quashed.
When is a jury used?
When a defendant pleads not guilty
What is the main role of the jury?
To decide if the defendant is guilty or not guilty
How do the judge and jury work alongside one another?
The judge decides on points of law and the jury decide if the defendant is guilty or not. The judge can direct the just to acquit on the grounds of insufficient evidence.
How can the judge direct a jury?
Towards an acquittal (directed acquittal)
How many cases are directly acquitted annually?
10% roughly
What role does the trial judge have?
They sum up the case for the jury at the end of the trial and directs them on points of law
What must the judge always do?
Accept the decision even if he does not agree with it
What is Bushells case 1670 relevant to?
That the judge must accept the juries decision even if he doesn’t agree with it
In what year was Bushell’s case?
1670
What case happened in 1670?
Bushells case
What happened in Bushell’s case?
Jurors refused to convict Quaker activists of unlawful assembly. The judge would not accept the guilty verdict and ordered them to continue their deliberations without food or drink. When the jurors persisted the court fined them and committed them to prison until the fines were paid
What was the out come of Bushells case 1670?
The court of common pleas ordered their release and held jurors could not be punished for their verdicts
What principle did Bushell’s case 1670 establish?
That jurors were the sole arbiters of fact and the judge could not challenge their decision
What have successive governments tried to do in terms of juries?
Limit their use, but there’s debate as too if this is the right thing to do
What did the criminal law act 1977 do?
Removed the right to a jury in a significant number of offences e.g criminal damage under £5000
What act was created in 1977?
The criminal law act
What year was the criminal law act?
1977
What piece of of legislation has reduced the use of a jury?
Criminal law act 1977
What type of verdict must the jury reach?
A unanimous verdict
When will a majority verdict be accepted?
If the jury are undecided after 2 hours
What is a majority verdict?
If there’s 12 jurors, 11-1 or 10-2
If there’s less than 12 members of the jury then only 1 can disagree
If there’s 9 jurors the before must be unanimous
What case is relevant to the jury reaching a verdict?
McKenna (1960)
What case happened in 1960?
McKenna
What year was the case of McKenna?
1960
What is the case of McKenna (1960) relevant to?
The judge not pressuring the jury to reach a decision
What happened in the case of McKenna (1960)?
The judge told the jury that if they did not reach a decision within ten minutes they would be locked up all night.
What was the outcome of McKenna (1960)?
They came back with a guilty verdict in 6 minutes but the conviction was quashed by the court of appeal
How must juries reach their decision?
In private, no inquiry can be made into the decision but the jury can ask the judge for clarification of a point
What is the problem with juries secrecy?
The ban means we don’t know how juries actually decide the verdict or if they actually understood the issues involved
Briefly, what are the criticisms of the selection process?
Use of the electoral register
Multi-racial juries
Disqualified jurors
Prosecutions right to stand by
Explain the problem of using the electoral register to select jurors…
The electoral register is not always a representative sample of the population it excludes some groups like the homeless who cannot register to vote. Also not everyone who is eligible to vote registers e.g students, ethic minorities
Explain the ‘multi-racial juries’ criticism…
According to Ford 1989 ethic minority’s defendants have no right to an ethnically balanced jury. It was recommended by the Runciman Commission 1993 that in exceptional cases the defence or prosecution should be to apply for the jury to have up to 3 jurors from an ethnic minority
Who said ethnic minority’s have no right to an ethnically balanced jury?
Ford (1989)
Who discussed multi-racial juries in 1989?
Ford
In what year did Ford discuss multi-racial juries?
1989
What is Ford (1989) relevant to?
According to Ford, ethnic minorities have no right to an ethnically balanced jury
What happened in 1993?
The Runciman committee recommended that in exceptional cases the prosecution and defence should be able to apply for the selection of the jury to have up to 3 jurors from an ethnic minority. This was never implemented.
In what year did the Runciman committee make its recommendations?
1993
Explain the disqualified jurors criticism (in relation to the selection process)…
Some people who are disqualified may hide this and sit on a jury. A survey of London juries estimated 1 in 24 jurors are disqualified
What number of jurors are disqualified and don’t declare this?
One in 24
Explain the how the prosecutions right to stand by is a criticism of the selection process?
It might be seen as giving the prosecution an advantage especially when combined with vetting
Briefly, what are the advantages of juries?
Public confidence Jury equity Open system of justice Secrecy of the jury room Impartiality
Explain the ‘public confidence ‘ advantage of having a jury…
Using a jury is seen as fundamental in a democratic society. The public have confidence in 12 ordinary members of the public more than a single judge. As Lord Devlin said ‘juries are the lamp that shows that freedom lives’
What did Lord Devlin once say about juries?
‘Juries are the lamp that shows that freedom lives’
Who once said ‘juries are the lamp that shows that freedoms lives’?
Lord Devlin
Explain how ‘jury equity’ is an advantage of a jury..,
Because jurors are not legal experts they are not bound the follow precedent or legislation, they decide on their idea of fairness or equity. An example being R v Owen (1992)
What case happened in 1992?
R v Owen
In what year did the case of R v Owen happen?
1992
What is the case of R v Owen (1992) relevant to?
Perverse killings and how juries can come to a decision based on their ideas of fairness as they are not bound to follow precedent or legislation
What happened in the case of R v Owen (1992)?
A man who attempted to kill a lorry driver who killed his son was acquitted by the jury even though he had brought a gun, aimed and fired it and wounded his girlfriend
Explain how ‘open system of justice’ is an advantage of juries…
Having a jury is seen as making the legal systems more open. Justice is seen to be done by member of the public who are involved in a key role.
Explain how secrecy of the jury room is an advantage of juries…
Juries are free from pressure and can bring verdicts which may be unpopular with the public. People might not be as willing to serve if they knew their discussion would be made public
Explain how ‘impartiality’ is an advantage of juries…
Juries are not connected to anyone in the case and random selection should result in a cross section on society, this should cancel out jurors biases. Jurors are not as case hardened as a judge
Briefly, what are the disadvantages of a jury?
Media influence Bias Lack of understanding Secrecy Jurors not following rules Expensive and slow Traumatic Problems with civil juries
How is media influence a disadvantage of juries?
Jurors may be influenced by the media, particularly in high profile cases. Rosemary West who was charged with a number of murders alongside her husband. She appealed to the court of appeal arguing media coverage meant she didn’t get a fair trial
What happened in the case of Rosemary West?
Her and her husband were charged with murder with a number of young women. She appealed to the court of appeal claiming she didn’t get a fair trial because of media coverage. Her appeal was rejected
What is the case of Rosemary West relevant to?
That media influence is a disadvantage of juries
Explain the ‘bias’ point as a disadvantage of juries…
Juries may be racially prejudiced as the selection process can produce an all white jury. In Sander v UK 2000 ECHR it was held there was a break of article 6 of the ECHR. One juror wrote to the judge easing concerns the others were making racist remarks. The judge as the jurors to ‘search their conscience’. The next day a juror admitted to making the racist remarks
What case happened in 2000?
Sander v UK ECHR
In what year was the case of Sander v UK ECHR?
2000
What happened in the case of Sander v UK (2000) ECHR?
it was held there was a break of article 6 of the ECHR. One juror wrote to the judge easing concerns the others were making racist remarks. The judge as the jurors to ‘search their conscience’. The next day a juror admitted to making the racist remarks
What is the case of Sander v UK (2000) ECHR relevant to?
That juries may be bias and this is a disadvantage of juries
Explain how lack of understanding is a disadvantage of juries…
There are worries jurors may not understand the case. This is partly supported by a survey for the Runciman committee 1992 where 10% of jurors admitted having difficulties understanding the evidence.
What happened in 1992?
The Runciman committee conducted a survey and found 10% of jurors had difficulty understanding the case
What year did the Runciman committee conduct a survey?
1992
How is secrecy a disadvantage of juries?
It can make appeals very difficult
Unfair decisions may be reached. This is demonstrated in the case of Young (1991). The jurors had to stay overnight in a hotel as they were still reaching a decision. During which time they conducted a seance to try to contact the victims. The next day they found him guilty.
What case happened in 1991?
Young
In what year was the case of Young?
1991
What happened in the case of Young (1991)?
The jurors had to stay overnight in a hotel as they were still reaching a decision. During which time they conducted a seance to try to contact the victims. The next day they found him guilty.
What is the case of Young (1991) relevant to?
The problems of juries having secrecy
Explain the ‘jurors not following the rules’ disadvantage point?
In 2010 a juror was jailed for communicating with the defendant on Facebook
In 2012 another was jailed for researching the defendant
Jurors are explicitly told not to do these things
Explain how jury service is a disadvantage because it can be traumatic?
Looking at traumatic evidence e.g in the case of rosemary west
What are the problems with civil juries?
Juries are responsible for awarding damages however they are unskilled at doing this, the rates vary dramatically and they often award them too high. Esther Rantzen was awarded £250,000 which was later reduced to £110,000
What are the alternatives to a jury trial?
Trial by a panel of judges
A mini- jury
How would a panel of judges work instead of a jury?
As seen in some European countries a panel of 3-5 judges could be used
What would be the advantages of a panel of judges?
It allows for a balance of views instead of a verdict of one judge but there’s a level of expertise and professionalism.
What would be the disadvantages of a panel of judges?
There could still be the problem of case hardened judges
Currently there are an insufficient number of judges and it would be expensive to implement this major overhaul
What are the advantages of a mini jury?
It holds all the perks of a jury trial but would be less expensive
What would be the disadvantages of a mini-jury?
There’s a greater chance of jurors biases prevailing
