Juries

Question 1

What two cases established the indepdence of the jury

Answer 1

Bushells case (1670)
R v McKenna (1960)

Question 2

How many trials are juries used in

Answer 2

2% of all criminal trials

Question 3

What are the qualifications to be a juror

Answer 3

Aged between 18 and 75 (age increased from 70 by Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015)
Registered as a parliamentary or local gov elector
Resident in UK for five years

Question 4

Why would you be permanently disqualified from being a juror?

Answer 4

If you had:
Been imprisoned/detention/custody for life
Dentition during her majesty’s pleasure(prison) or during pleasure of sec of state (young offenders)
Prison for public protection
Extended sentence
Imprisonment/ detention for 5+ years

Question 5

What would disqualify you from being a juror for 10 years

Answer 5

Served a prison sentence in last ten years
Suspended sentence in last ten years
Community order or communities sentence in last ten years

Question 6

What is another thing that can disqualify you from being a juror and what’s the fine if you’re disqualified but don’t disclose and show up

Answer 6

Being on bail, and £5000

Question 7

Give some exemptions from jury service

Answer 7

Mentally disordered person as defined under Crim Jus Act 2003 (mental or pyschatric disorder, resident in a hospital or similar institution or regularly attends treatment by med practitioner, person being under guardianship under s 7 of Mental Health Act 1983 and who under s7 it that Act is incapable of administrating property and affairs)
Prior to 2004, doctors pharmacists etc had right to be excused but Crim Jus Act 2003 abolished this so now members of the forced will be the only ones exempt from jury service of commanding officer certifies their absence from duty would not be good for their service

Question 8

What are some excuses for jury service

Answer 8

Court has discretion, and reasons such as being really ill or mother with a young child, holiday booked and paid for. More likely to be deferred to another date than excuse completely. Not excused but doesn’t show up then fine can be up to £1k

Question 9

When were lawyers and police officers not allowed to be excused from serving on jury anymore and what’s the issue with this

Answer 9

Crim just act 2003, and could lead to bias or influence. See R v Abdroikof, R v Green and R v Williamson (2007) & Hanif v United Kingdom (2012)

Question 10

What did Lord Bingham state that’s so important to the way juries work

Answer 10

Justice must be seen to be done

Question 11

What did the Lord Chief Justice Lord Woolf point out about judges on jury service

Answer 11

Judge serves on jury as part of duty as priv citizen
Excuses granted in extreme circumstances
Deferral should be sought if judge has judicial commitments
Should raise it with staff if knows prieising judge or those on case
Discretion of judge to disclose he’s a judge to the jury
Judge must follow directions given to jury on the law and not correct guidance as that’s outside his role as jury member

Question 12

What is the criteria for lack of capacity

Answer 12

May discharge or lack of capacity to cope with trial. Such as not good standards of English, learning disabilities or sometimes if your blind and evidence mainly visual. Doesn’t prevent from being juror(as stated in section 9B(2) of juries act 1974) but blindness can be an issue if evidence is visual.
Deaf jurors can be an issue as interpreter is an extra person in the court room and would throw numbers off. Ie June 1995 deaf man prevented as sitting as extra person in court, same thing pointed out in Nov 1999

Question 13

How are juries selected

Answer 13

Names selected randomly from electoral register done through PC selection at local office. More than 12 jurors summoned as don’t know who will be disqualified. If summoned you need to tell court you can’t attend. If trial longer than two weeks then must stay till completion, if really long like fraud trials sometimes asked if they can stay

Question 14

What is vetting

Answer 14

Checked for suitability, by police and wider background checks.
Police checks made to eliminated those who are disqualified. R v crown Court at Sheffield ex party Brownlow (1980) the defendant was police officer and defence sought permission to vet jury panel for convictions. CoA rules they had no point to interfere and this was a serious invasion of privacy not sanctioned by Juries Act 1974
However was allowed by CoA in R v mason (1980) despite chief of Northamptonshire police allowed unauthorised widespread vetting as Lawton LJ ruled they were only doing their job
Wider background check: brought to light by ABC trial 1978 when 2 journalists and solider charged with collecting secret info. AG publishes guidelinea in 1980 saying that only should be used in cases involving national security like terrorism and only with the AGs express permission

Question 15

What is the process for selection at court

Answer 15

Jurors divided into groups of 15, 12 out of 15 selected. Prosecution and defence have right to challenge one of more jurors on to the array, for cause or to stand by.
To array/ : given by s5 of Juries Act 1974. Challenge that whole jury not been selves randomly. Seen in R v Fraser (1987) where defendant of ethnic minority’s and whole jury was white. However similar thing in R v Ford (1989) jury not changed simply bc not multi racial
For cause: challenges right of individual juror to sit on jury. Valid reason must be pointed out like if juror knows witness or disqualified etc
Right to stand by: only prosecution allowed to do this. Juror put at end of jury list so won’t be used unless not enough jurors. Doesn’t have to give reason why but AG guidelines emphasise this should be used sparingly

Question 16

What is split function

Answer 16

Judge decides point of law and jury decides verdict on case facts. Judge can direct jury to acquit defendant if it is decided the prosecutions case has not made out a case of legal wrongdoing. Called directed acquittal.

Question 17

What happens when jury retires to a private room

Answer 17

Discuss verdict and come up with a unanimous one. If they can’t then majority verdict can be used if judge thinks fit, needing a 10:2 or 11:1 or 10:1 if lost a member. Introduced due to fear of nobbling and one person not agreeing due to being bribed and bringing about a stalemate, as well as rate of acquittal thought being too high. When jury convicts on a majority verdict the foreman has to announce numbers agreeing and disagreeing in open court. Provision contained in s17 (3) of Juries Act 1974 and to make sure jury comes to legal majority and not 8:4 for example which isn’t allowed

Question 18

Why is secrecy so important in a jury trial

Answer 18

Disclosure of what happened in a jury room is contempt of court, and now under Crim Justice and courts Act 2015 a criminal offence to intentionally obtain, disclose or solicit any particulars of votes, arguments made, opinions expressed by jury. Disclosure only allowed in cases in the interests of justice like juror misconduct

Question 19

Advantages of jury trial?

Answer 19

Public confidence: right to be tried by peers is fundamental to democracy and is supported by many judges ie Lord Devlin said juries are ‘the lamp that shows freedom lives’. People have confidence in the impartiality of Juries and fairness of trial by jury, evident seen in the objection of removing the right from a minor theft case
Jury equity: not bound to follow precedent of previous cases or even Acts of Parliament and don’t have to give reasons for judgement therefore more likely to decide on their op ions of fair. IE pontings case (1984) and the acquittal of a mother who attempted to murder her daughter who had committed suicide
Open system of justice: legal system more open, justice seen to be done as members of public are key. Keeps law clearer as points of law explained to the jury.
Secrecy of jury room: free from outside pressure. No influences from public so no verdicts brought in can be scrutinised by public or have to follower letter or law to a T. People more willing to serve as not a public process
Impartial- not connected to anyone in the case. Cross section of society so impartial as juries have different prejudices and cancel out each others biases. Not case hardnened as usually only sits for two weeks

Question 20

Disadvantages of a jury trial

Answer 20

Perverse decisions, and therefore not justified. See R v Randle and Pottle (1991) and R v Krnolid and others (1996)

Secrecy: no way of knowing jury understood the case and came to decision for right reasons. See R v mirza (2004) and R v Connor and Rollock (2004). (Exceptions when another method been used to make decisions ie R v Young (Stephen) (1995) or extraneous material used like in R v Karakya (2005)

Jurors and internet: directed not to look on there for info however it’s being more common. 12% admitted to looking at internet for info (done by Cheryl Thomas in Are juries fairs? (2010)). Ie previous convictions of denfendabt. Crim jus and courts act 2015 makes this illegal and also to disclose other info to a jury member

Racial bias: prejudices can affect verdict ie racial or against police (Sander V UK (2000)

Media influence: may influence juror decisions

Lack of understating: may not understand what they’re trying. Ie Are juries fair research into 797 jurors in 3 different areas all saw same simulated trial and heard same instructions. 31% of juries understood directions fully and when written down 48%! Did

Fraud trials: usually very complex and hard to understand. Strain on work as can take months. Usually expensive cases for pros and def too. Domestic violence crime and victims act 2004 there’s a special provision where cases where large number of counts on indictment. Allows a trial of sample counts with a jury and then if defendant convicted on those the remainder can be tried by judge alone. Helps to prevent long jury trials in complex fraud cases

Jury tampering: bribing or threatening. To combat that there’s s44 of Crim Jus Act 2003 where there’s already been an effort to jury tampering so can apply for hearing by Judge alone. See R v Twomey and others (2009) and KS v R (2010)

High acquittal rates: 60% who plead NG at crown ads acquitted but includes those discharged by judge and where judge directed and acquittal. More than half acquittals are by a judge without a jury even sworn in as pros drop the case at the last minute. 10% acquittals by jury on a judges direction due to a legal point or pros evidence isn’t enough

Jury system unpopular so some may rush their service or be against the Austen. Can be a strain if having to listen to horrid evidence

Question 21

Comparison of juries with lay mags

Answer 21

Cross section of society: members of community making decisions about cases. Better balance if men and women for juries whereas 53% mags are female. Both have lots of ethnic involvement. Lay mags often perceived as middle aged and middle class. Juries from wide age range and backgrounds.

Local knowledge: both live near the courts but mags due to class are most likely not gonna know about issues affecting poorer areas whereas jurors from wider cross section are.

Cost: them replacing unpaid judges has saved about £100 mil a year. Mags trial cost is cheaper. Jury more expensive as paid judge and length of case longer due to deliberations and therefore cost

Training: mags have training so not complete amateurs. Majority of decisions made by common sense. Jurors have no training and often have to consider complicated directions form a judge on points of law

Question 22

Alternatives to jury trial

Answer 22

Trial by single judge: used from some crim up to 2007 in Northern Ireland. Called diplock courts as brought in on recommendation of Lord Diplock to replace jury due to threaten and jury nibbling between sectarian parties. Less public confidence tho as view that judges are prosecution minded and would have difficulty understanding issues from different areas whereas jury has a range of people and helps to eliminate bias. But judges are also now getting training in racial awareness so

Panel of judges: 3 or 5 judges sit on a panel in some continental countries. Allows for view balance but still has issues of case hardened judges. Not sufficient judges and our legal system n training would need radical overhauls plus expensive

Judge plus lay assessors: judge and two laybpekple, used in Scandinavian countries. Legal expertise of judge and ordinarily people of public or special panel of assessors. Particularly suitable for fraud cases

Mini jury: used with a smaller number of jurors like 9. Used in Spain after reintroduction of use of juries for certain crim cases in 1996. 6 could be used in a less serious trial which is used in the USA