Module 9 - Criminal court and laypeople

Question 1

What are lay people, and what can they serve as?

Answer 1

Lay people are ordinary citizens who are involved in the legal system without formal qualifications or legal training.
> Lay people can serve as lay magistrates or jurors, and their involvement is intended to make the legal system fairer.

Question 2

What are the key characteristics of lay magistrates?

Answer 2

Lay magistrates are involved in most criminal cases in England and Wales.
> Unpaid
> Typically sit in panels of two or three to hear cases.
> Assisted by a legal adviser
> Range of cases, including minor assaults, motoring offenses, and theft.
> Must be at least 18 and under 65, and demonstrate certain qualities such as good character, social awareness, and sound judgment.

Question 2

What is a jury?

Answer 2

A jury is a group of 12 randomly selected individuals who decide verdicts in certain criminal cases in the Crown Court, based on evidence and guided by judicial instructions.

Question 2

What is a lay magistrate?

Answer 2

A lay magistrate, or justice of the peace, is a volunteer who adjudicates minor criminal and civil cases in the Magistrates’ Court, relying on legal advice from a clerk as they lack professional legal qualifications.

Question 2

What is a lay juror?

Answer 2

A lay juror is an ordinary citizen selected to serve on a jury, tasked with assessing evidence and determining a defendant’s guilt or innocence in criminal trials.

Question 2

What was established in Bushell’s Case (1670), in relation to the history of the jury.

Answer 2

• Independence of the jury established in 1670 through Bushell’s Case;
  > The jury determined the offenders were guilty but refused to add a point the judge wanted. The judge then took a series of actions against the jury, i.e. locking them up overnight without food, water, or heat, fining the jury for contempt of court and removing them to prison until the fine was paid
  > Bushell, a member of the jury, refused to pay the fine and filed a successful writ of “habeas corpus” which released him.
  > The presiding judge ruled that jurors could not be fined or imprisoned for returning a verdict that conflicted with the judge’s assessment.

Question 2

What key concept was established in the ruling of Bushell’s Case?

Answer 2

This ruling is known as “Jury Equity” and is considered a foundational moment in the history of jury power.

Question 3

What is jury equity?

Answer 3

Jury equity is the principle that jurors can deliver a verdict based on fairness and moral considerations, even if it contradicts the letter of the law, as illustrated in cases like Ponting’s Case (1984).

Question 4

What was Ponting’s Case (1984)?

Answer 4

> Clive Ponting, a civil servant, leaked classified documents to a Member of Parliament. He was charged with breaching the Official Secrets Act. However, he was acquitted by a jury, which highlighted the advantage of juries in protecting individuals from the government.

Question 5

What is the modern role of a jury, and what % of criminal cases are heard by magistrates compared to juries?

Answer 5

• Modern role are the ‘deciders of fact’
  > 97% of criminal cases are heard by magistrates, but only 1-2% are heard by juries

Question 6

What is the setup of a jury in a Crown Court (i.e. amount of people and what cases they decide on?)

Answer 6

• Crown court (jury of twelve)
  > Serious criminal cases (murder, manslaughter, rape)
  > Verdict; guilty or not guilty

Question 6

What is the setup of a jury in a High Court (i.e. amount of people and what cases they decide on?)

Answer 6

• High Court (jury of twelve)
  > Defamation, libel and slander; false imprisonment; malicious prosecution; fraud
  > Decides liability and amount of damages

Question 7

What is the setup of a jury in a County Court (i.e. amount of people and what cases they decide on?)

Answer 7

• County Court (jury of eight)
  > Defamation, libel and slander; false imprisonment; malicious prosecution; fraud
  > Decides liability and amount of damages
  > Incredibly similar to High Court (just a lower court)

Question 8

What is the setup of a jury in a Coroner’s Court (i.e. amount of people and what cases they decide on?)

Answer 8

• Coroner’s Court (jury of between seven and eleven)
  > Deaths (in prison, police custody, industrial accident and where health and safety of the public is involved)
  > Decides cause of death

Question 9

What is a case in relation to the coroner’s court?

Answer 9

Stephen Lawrence (1993)
- Example of a case dealt in the coroner’s court
> Stephen Lawrence, a Black teenager, was murdered in a racially motivated attack. The initial police investigation was criticized for its handling of the case, particularly its failure to arrest the suspects. The case was eventually referred to the coroner’s court, which investigated the circumstances of Stephen’s death.
> The coroner’s inquest highlighted the failings of the police investigation and led to significant changes in the way that the police handle racially motivated crimes.

Question 10

What are some reasons for jury disqualifications and excusals?

Answer 10

> Permanent disqualification (i.e. have served a long prison sentence)
Sentenced in the last ten years
Mental disorders
Lack of capacity (i.e. low IQ)
Armed forces (depends)
Discretionary excusal (i.e. carer for elderly or young)

Question 11

What are the advantages of a jury?

Answer 11

Public confidence
- Jury equity (Ponting’s Case 1984)
- Open system of justice is a keystone of a democratic society
- Less mystery (members of public are given understanding of the law)
- Secrecy (no outside pressure when deciding on decision)
- Independence (i.e. Bushell’s Case)
- Impartiality
- Has worthwhile previous lifetime experience

Question 12

What happened in Coulson (2021)?

Answer 12

• Example of a jury trial and a perverse decision
  > The statue of Edward Colston, a 17th-century slave trader, was toppled and thrown into Bristol Harbour during a Black Lives Matter protest. This act was a significant moment in the global movement for racial justice and a rejection of historical figures linked to the slave trade.
  > The four individuals charged with criminal damage in connection with the toppling of the statue were acquitted by a jury.

Question 12

What are the disadvantages of a jury?

Answer 12

• Perverse decisions (i.e. Coulson)
• Secrecy: Young 1995
• Lack of understanding is possible (i.e. Connor & Rollock); esp in fraud
• Racial bias (i.e. Sandler v UK); or anti-police bias
• Media influence: West 1996
• High acquittal rate (35% compared to 20%)
• Counselling needed (i.e. for horrific crimes, like Jamie Bolger case)
• Jurors may be keen to get trial over with and not consider facts
• Jury nobbling (influence of the jury to reach a certain result)
• Trials are slow and expensive

Question 13

What happened in Connor and Rollock (1996)?

Answer 13

• Example of a disadvantage of a jury and a lack of understanding
  > The defendants were involved in a confrontation where one of them fatally stabbed a victim.
  > The case revolved around the principle of joint enterprise, examining whether both could be held liable for murder despite only one committing the fatal act.
  > The court upheld their convictions, ruling that joint enterprise liability applied because both foresaw the possibility of serious harm arising from their shared criminal actions.

Question 14

What happened in Young (1995)?

Answer 14

• Example of a disadvantage of a jury and secrecy
  > This case involved a jury that was exposed to prejudicial information about the defendant. The jury convicted the defendant, but the conviction was overturned on appeal. This case highlighted the disadvantage of juries, which is that they can be influenced by extraneous factors.
  > The conviction was overturned on appeal.

Question 15

What happened in Sandler v UK (2000)?

Answer 15

• Example of a disadvantage of a jury and racial bias
  > This case involved a man who was convicted of a crime by a jury. The man claimed that the jury had been biased against him. The European Court of Human Rights found that the man’s right to a fair trial had been violated. This case highlighted the disadvantage of juries, which is that they can be biased.
  > The European Court of Human Rights found that the man’s right to a fair trial had been violated.

Question 16

What happened in West (1995)?

Answer 16

• Example of a disadvantage of a jury and impact of media influence
  > Fred West (deceased before trial) and Rosemary West murdered at least 12 young women and girls between 1967 and 1987. Many were sexually assaulted, tortured, and buried at their home.
  > Rosemary was convicted in November 1995 on 10 counts of murder following a high-profile trial at Winchester Crown Court, sentenced to life imprisonment with a whole life tariff, meaning she will never be released.

Question 17

What happened in the James Bulger case (1992)?

Answer 17

• Example of where counselling is needed (horrific crime)
  > This case involved two young boys who were convicted of murdering a toddler. The case highlighted the disadvantage of juries, as cases can be incredibly difficult to sit through.
  > The two boys were convicted of murder.

Question 18

What are some reasons for choosing trial by jury?

Answer 18

• 60% of ‘not guilty’ pleas are acquitted by juries
  > In ½ of these cases, the prosecution offers no evidence and the judge discharges the case (jury uninvolved)
  > Another 10% are judge-directed acquittals
  > Actual jury acquittal is around 35%
  > Compared to magistrates acquittal rate (20%)
  Most defendants follow their lawyer’s advice based on above statistics
  > Guilty defendants may want to serve part of their sentence on remand
  > Defendant is more likely to get legal aid at a Crown Court
  > A lawyer at a Crown Court is likely much more experienced (certificate of advocacy)

Question 19

What is remand?

Answer 19

This refers to the process of detaining a defendant in custody or releasing them on bail while awaiting trial or sentencing.

Question 20

What are some reasons for not choosing a trial by jury?

Answer 20

• Longer wait
  > Markedly worse if defendant is actually not guilty, but not given bail and instead remanded in custody
  > Waiting times for Crown Court have been reduced over the years; nearly half the cases where the defendant pleads not guilty are dealt with within sixteen weeks
• Costs are much greater
  > Especially expensive for a defendant who is paying for legal advice
  > If the defendant is ordered to pay part of prosecution costs, then the overall cost will be even worse

If the defendant is found guilty, the judge has the power to give a greater sentence than a magistrates can; high risk, high reward

Question 21

What is jury nobbling?

Answer 21

This is the act of unlawfully interfering with jurors, such as through bribery or intimidation, to influence the outcome of a trial.

Question 22

What is vetting, and what are the two types of vetting (with examples)?

Answer 22

Vetting - a check for suitability

• Routine police checks
  > Mason (1980); acceptable
  > R v Crown Court at Sheffield, ex p Brounlow (1980); invasion of privacy
• Political vetting (only the AG can perform this)
  > Attorney-General’s guidelines (revised 1988); only to be used in exceptional cases (i.e. national security and terrorist cases), only with the AG’s permission

Question 23

What is challenging?

Answer 23

The process by which either party in a trial (prosecution or defence) can object to a juror serving on the jury.

Question 24

What does ‘judiciary’ mean?

Answer 24

Refers to the collective body of judges and magistrates who preside over and make decisions in courts, ensuring justice is administered fairly.

Question 25

What are the two types of challenging?

Answer 25

‘To the array’;
A challenge to the entire jury panel on the grounds that it has been improperly assembled or is biased.

‘For cause’;
A challenge to an individual juror based on specific reasons, such as a potential bias or a conflict of interest.

Question 26

What are some examples of ‘to the array’?

Answer 26

To the array:
- Romford jury (1993); 9/12 from the same area
- Fraser (1987); black defendant, all white jury
- Ford (1989); OK if chosen at random

Question 27

What are some examples of ‘for cause’?

Answer 27

For cause:
- Individual juror, e.g. disqualification or if known to the defendant (i.e. Wilson and Sprason (1995) - wife of prison officer on jury)
> Prosecutions right to stand-by juror; no reason need to be given, to be used sparingly; must stand by jury after selection and challenges
> Defendants right to peremptory challenge now abolished (could have been exploited for a more favourable jury); prevents unbalanced juries (i.e. Greenham Common (1985) (all women); Bristol riots (1982) case (all black))

Question 28

What are some criticisms of the selection of juries?

Answer 28

Use of electoral register
> Not always representative sample of the population; homeless are excluded; young and ethnic minorities may not be on electoral register

Multi-racial juries
> Is the jury desirable if the defendant is an ethnic minority (15% of the population but only 1/10 are registered to vote)

Disqualified jurors
> A disqualified juror may lie and fall through the cracks in the process to end up serving as a juror on a case; one source estimates 1 in 24 jurors are disqualified but fail to disclose the fact

Excusals
> Too many discretionary excusals may lead to a more underrepresentation

Prosecution’s right to ‘stand by’
> Seems unfair to keep this when the defense lost the right of peremptory challenge; more power to the prosecution

Question 29

What does ‘stand by’ mean?

Answer 29

The prosecution’s right to ask for a juror to be set aside during jury selection, typically without giving a reason, to be used only in exceptional circumstances.

Question 30

What is the entire process of the appointment of lay magistrates (appointment, first sitting, sittings, sessions, etc.)

Answer 30

Appointment;

• Introductory training
  > Understanding the organisation of bench, administration of court, responsibilities of court personnel
• Core training - key skills and understanding
• Activities
  > Observing court sittings, visits to prisons, probation office, etc

First sitting;

• Mentored sittings (mentor = experienced magistrate)
  > Structured to cover different aspects, e.g. bail, sentencing, short trial (8-11 sessions in first 2 years of sitting in court)
• Consolidated training sessions (7 in 2 years of sitting in court)
• Appraisal (extra training)
• Wingers (magistrates adjudicates, on either side of the chair)
• Continuation training and appraisal (three year cycle, appraisal also for chairman)

Question 31

What is the training of lay magistrates?

Answer 31

• Magistrates’ New Training Initiative (MNTI 1) and Magistrates’ National Training Initiative (MNTI 2) provide the framework;
  > Managing yourself; preparing for court; conduct in court; ongoing learning
  > Working in a team in court
  > Making judicial decisions - impartial and structured decision-making
  > (for the chair of the bench) managing judicial decision-making, chairman’s role, working with the legal adviser, managing the court, effective and impartial decision-making.

Question 32

What are the advantages of lay magistrates?

Answer 32

• 49% of lay magistrates are women compared to 10% of actual judges
• Much wider background compared to judges
• Ethnic minorities are reasonably well represented,
  although district judges are mostly white and male
  > £61.78 an hour for district judges
• Local knowledge
  > supported with a legal adviser
• Few appeals, most against sentencing which together with training is becoming much more effective and consistent.

Question 32

What are the disadvantages of lay magistrates?

Answer 32

• Despite being more representative, still not fully representative; middle-aged, middle-class, middle-minded people with professional backgrounds still outweigh all; larger tendency to do this - unrepresentative in class even if fairly representative in race
• Inconsistencies in sentencing nationwide
• No real knowledge on poorer areas
  > Even if someone grew up in a poorer area, the likelihood is they are now middle class and haven’t lived or been in that area in several years)
• Biased towards prosecution
  > Believes police too readily
  > CPS prosecutor is present often which may affect judgement
• Over-reliance on clerk, who shouldn’t help with sentencing
  > Clerk has legal experience so is relied upon, but should be limited to helping and not influencing the decision
• Not legally qualified

Question 33

What is a circuit judge?

Answer 33

A circuit judge is a solicitor/barrister training to be a judge, who has equivalent powers to three lay magistrates in court.

Question 34

What was the Constitutional Reform Act 2005?

Answer 34

> Replaced House of Lords in 2009 (before 2009, in theory, judges could interpret the law and make the law - not a separation of powers; looked bad in the eyes of the public)

Question 35

What happens when there is a vacancy in the Supreme Court?

Answer 35

> When there is a vacancy, the Lord Chancellor (LC) will have to convene a Supreme Court selection commission

Question 36

Who is on the Supreme Court selection commission?

Answer 36

Supreme Court selection commission

• President (and Deputy Pre.) of the Supreme Court
• Member from all three of the following:
  >Judicial Appointments Commission;
  > Judicial Appointments Board for Scotland;
  > Northern Ireland Judicial Appointments Commission

Question 37

What does the commission decide on, and who do they report to?

Answer 37

Commission decides on selection process to be used and reports to LC; LC can reject them and ask commission to reconsider
> Once accepted, LC informs the PM and the monarch.

Question 38

What is the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court in the UK?

Answer 38

• Jurisdiction
  > All civil cases in the UK
  > All criminal cases (but not in Scotland)

Question 39

What is the role of a judicial assistant in the Supreme Court?

Answer 39

• Judicial assistants sit in court and do research for the judges (i.e. a clerk); different role compared to the magistrates

Question 40

What is the Supreme Court?

Answer 40

• Highest (appellate) court in the UK
  > No jury, no witness, no facts; just points of law, setting a precedent

Question 41

What is the benefit of all cases being recorded in the Supreme Court?

Answer 41

• Judiciary much more open and accessible
• Higher legitimacy (democratic)

Question 42

What is the Judicial Committee Privy Counsel?

Answer 42

> Acts as a persuasive precedent
For Commonwealth, British overseas and Crown land.
Sees over 40 cases a year
Some countries are removing themselves from this (i.e. Barbados)

Question 43

Who comprises the Judicial Appointments Commission?

Answer 43

15 members
> 6 lay members; 5 judges (three from CoA/High, one circuit, one district; one barrister; one solicitor; one magistrate; one tribunal member
> Likely a diverse group, making the judiciary reflect the pluralist society

Question 44

What are appointments solely based on?

Answer 44

• Appointments made solely based on merit
• Commission entirely responsible for assessing this and selecting candidates
• LC has limited powers

Question 45

What happened in R v Gnango?

Answer 45

> New laws on murder and joint enterprise
A shoots at B, B shoots back, A misses and kills C, flees and is never caught, yet B is caught
B goes to jail for murder in a 3:2 vote in the Supreme Court
Arguably an ‘unlawful manslaughter’, but charged to ‘dissuade gangster activity’

Question 46

What does it mean to be given bail, and who might bail be given to?

Answer 46

Being given bail means being granted liberty until the next stage of the case; bail may be given to someone who has been charged with an offence or someone who has not been charged but about whom the police are making further enquiries

Question 47

What % of those charged with a crime are granted bail by the police?

Answer 47

> 84% of those charged are given bail by the police (can be given by police, magistrates or a Crown Court)

Question 48

Who can grant bail?

Answer 48

Can be given by police, magistrates or a Crown Court

Question 49

What happens in the police do not grant bail?

Answer 49

> If the police do not grant bail they must bring D to a court; if the magistrates cannot deal with the case at first instance, D is either granted bail or remanded in custody

Question 50

What is the Bail Act 1976?

Answer 50

Bail Act 1976
> General right to bail

Question 51

What instances should bail not be granted in?

Answer 51

• Some instances where bail should not be granted
  > If D would fail to surrender to custody
  > If D would commit an offence on bail
  > If D would interfere with witnesses or commit an obstruction of justice

Question 52

What do the courts consider when granting bail?

Answer 52

The courts will consider;
> Nature and seriousness of the crime
> Likely method of dealing with it
> D’s character, past record, associations and community ties
> Strength of evidence

Question 53

What are some possible conditions required by the court for bail?

Answer 53

Some possible conditions required by the court include;
> Surrender of passport (i.e. AO2 Diddy)
> Curfew and tagging (i.e. in house arrest)
> Reporting to the police station
> Residence (i.e. must be at X during certain times)
> Surety (money in exchange for liberty, only returned if D is present)

Question 54

Why could bail not be granted?

Answer 54

Bail will not be granted if;
> Foreign citizens suspended on committing terrorism (A-TCS Act 2001)
> Charged with murder, attempted murder, manslaughter
> Those who have already served in custody for a similar indictable offense
> Adults charged with a drugs related offence and testing positive for Class A when in custody
> Adults who have committed the alleged offence while on bail (Criminal Justice Act 2003)

Question 55

What happened with Russell Simmons in connection with bail?

Answer 55

Russell Simmons, the co-founder of Def Jam Recordings, has faced numerous allegations of sexual assault since 2017, during the height of the #MeToo movement.
> Simmons moved to Bali, Indonesia, which does not have an extradition treaty with the United States, while on bail.
> While Simmons maintains that his move was unrelated to these allegations, accusers argue it complicates efforts to hold him accountable. For example, Simmons has reportedly resisted participating in depositions and other legal proceedings, leading to delays in case resolutions​