Juries Evaluation Flashcards
advantages -jury equity
Juries are allowed to judge according to their conscience. Sometimes called ‘‘jury equity’‘Unlike Bushell’s case, judges today are not allowed to sway or bully juries to find in a certain way. They can decide cases on their own idea of “fairness” and do not have to follow the law as they are not legal experts. However, perverse verdicts can come from over sensitive juries. It is unfair to allow defendants to be found not guilty when there is clearly no legal defence to a crime. It may lead to uncertainty in the law. In Ponting’s Case (1984) the jury refused to convict a civil servant for sharing secret information with a civil servant. In 2021 a jury acquitted 6 Extinction Rebellion protestors despite being told by the judge that there was no defence in law
advantage of juries-jury secrecy
one advantage of juries is jury secrecy this is because Jury discussion takes place in secret. With secrecy a jury feels free to come to their decision without pressure or fear of reprisals from others. This allows them to bring in verdicts that might be unpopular with the public. The Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 makes it a criminal offence to disclose anything that happens in the jury room. However because of this there is no way of knowing what if the jury came to the verdict for the right reasons. In R v Mirza (2004) after claims were made of racial bias amongst jurors, the House of Lords ruled that it could not enquire into discussion in the jury room. In R v Young it emerged that jurors had used a ouija board to help them reach their decision. This was only disclosed because the jurors had had to stay overnight in a hote
Advantages of Juries: Public confidence
one advantage of juries is Public confidence. The public have trust in the jury system, believing it to be one of the fundamentals of a democratic society. The right to be tried by one’s peers is a bastion of liberty against the state and has been supported by eminent judges. Lord Devlin said juries are the “lamp that shows that freedom lives.” People seem to have confidence in the impartiality and fairness of a jury trial. This is supported by the random selection of juries. On the other hand, the random selection of juries does not mean that they are representative of society as a whole. It is important that the jury is seen to be representative and unbiased
Advantages of Juries -Open system of justice
Open system of justice The use of a jury is viewed as making the legal system more open as members of the public are involved in a key role and the whole process is public. It also helps keep the law clearer as points have to be explained to the jury and this helps the defendant to understand the law as well. However juries are often criticised on the grounds that they acquit too many defendants. About half of defendants who plead not guilty are acquitted in the Crown Court as opposed to a third in Magistrates’ Courts. This is not necessarily a true picture though as Criminal Court statistics show that a third of acquittals are ordered by the judge without a jury even being sworn in to try the case.
disadvantages of juries:lack of comptence
one disadvantages of juries is Lack of competence, particularly in fraud trials. There are worries that jurors might not understand the case which they are trying. In the Vicky Pryce trial the defendant was accused of perverting the cause of justice. The jury asked the judge 10 questions that showed they had not understood the facts of the case or the instructions given by the judge. The jury was dischatged. However, the idea that jurors are ordinary people with no special knowledge or training is one of the factors that is seen as upholding the fairness and openness of the jury system.
disadvantages of juries -perverse decisions
They sometimes come to perverse verdicts; this means that jurors ignore the evidence and give a wrong decision. They make decisions based on their own ideas of “fairness” rather than the evidence put before them in court. R v Randle and Pottle (1991) R v Kronlid and others (1996) S8 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981 prohibits juries being asked about the reasons for their decisions. On the other hand, what may seem like a perverse verdict is an illustration of jury independence and helps to maintain public confidence in the system.
disadvantages of juries -bias
Bias. Juries may be biased in favour of one party or the other, either against the police or against an ethnic minority. The fact that there are 12 of them is supposed to mean that different biases balance each other out but there may still be sufficient bias within the jury to affect the verdict. Racial prejudice can be an issue. In Sander v UK (2000) a juror wrote a note to the judge saying that other jurors were openly racist. However, in the Are Juries Fair? Report in 2010 it was found that white jurors were no more likely to convict a Black or Asian defendant than a White one. In fact it was found that all white juries in Nottingham were more likely to convict a white defendant accused of assaulting a black victim.
