(RED) Criminal Courts: Juries

Question 1

What does s1 of the Juries Act 1974 (amended by the Criminal Justice Act 2003) say the eligibility criteria is for jury service?

Answer 1

1) Must be between 18 and 75 years old
2) Must have been a UK resident for at least 5 years consecutively since 13th birthday
3) Must be on the electoral register

Question 2

Who is unfit for jury service?

Answer 2

• Mentally disordered people which includes any mental disorder under the Mental Health Act 1983.
• People who are incapable- they have a physical disablity like deafness or blindness.

Question 3

Who does s1 of the Juries Act 1974 (amended by the Criminal Justice Act 2003) disqualify from serving as a juror?

Answer 3

People with certain criminal convictions. Disqualification is permanent if the offender is serving a life sentence or has ever been sentenced to a prison sentence of 5 years or more. Temporary disqualification applies to those on bail who are disqualified for the duration of their bail or is 10 years for an offender who has been given a prison sentence of less than 5 years or is given a community order.

Question 4

Which section of the Juries Act 1974 allows for an excusal or deferral which means the service is cancelled or moved to a more convenient time and what must be given?

Answer 4

S9 of the Juries Act 1974.
A good reason must be given like religious holidays, exams, work commitments, childcare commitments, holidays etc.

Question 5

Who couldn’t sit on a jury before the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and why did this change?

Answer 5

Judges, lawyers, police officers and priests. It was thought it would be unfair for people like police officers and judges to sit on a jury as they fundamentally lean towards prosecution but the number of eligible people was too small and so this had to be extended to stop people getting summoned again and again.

Question 6

How are names selected for jury service?

Answer 6

It is done at random by a computer from the Electoral Register.

Question 7

What is the process of summoming jurors?

Answer 7

After the names are selected, summons are sent to those people. Those people must notify the court if there is any reason they can or can’t do jury service. Those summoned will be expected to attend for a minimum of 2 weeks although if a trial is expected to last longer than this, jurors will be asked if they can serve.

Question 8

What does vetting mean and what types of vetting are there?

Answer 8

Checking potential jurors for their suitability.

1) Police checks- these ensure no potential juror is disqualified from having previous convictions.
2) Wider background checks into a juror’s political affiliations- this can only be done in exceptional circumstances like in terrorist cases or cases involving national security. The Attorney General must give express permission for this.

Question 9

What happens to the 15 jurors who get called into a trial?

Answer 9

The court clerk selects 12 of them at random and then the Prosecution and the Defence have the chance to challenge the jury.

Question 10

What is challenging the whole jury and why would it be done?

Answer 10

It can be done by both Prosecution and Defence and is called a ‘challenge to the array’. This is because the jury is unrepresentative or selected in a bias way. e.g. R v Fraser where D was from ethnic minority and jury were all white. Or Romford jury where 9 of 12 jurors were from the same street.

Question 11

What is challenging an indiviual juror and why would it be done?

Answer 11

It can be done by both Prosecution and Defence and is called ‘challenge for cause’. This is because the juror is disqualified or may know someone is the case. e.g. R v Wilson and Sprason where a juror was the wife of the prison officer overseeing Vs.

Question 12

How else can the Prosecution challenge the jury?

Answer 12

They can ask a juror to ‘stand by for the Crown’ which means that juror will only be used if there is no-one else. No reason is needed and they can do this to up to 3 jurors.

Question 13

What do jurors swear in an oath?

Answer 13

‘I swear by almighty God to faithfully try the defendant and give true verdicts according to the evidence’

Question 14

How many cases does the Crown Court hear a year?

Answer 14

Around 30,000 which is less than 2% of all criminal cases.

Question 15

What did Bushell’s case show?

Answer 15

That the judge is not allowed to influence the jury in their decision making and they must accept the jury’s verdict even if they don’t agree with it. The jury also don’t have to give reasons for their verdict.

Question 16

What is a directed acquittal?

Answer 16

Where the judge directs the jury to acquit D because the Prosecution’s case gave insufficient evidence. The jury must then acquit D. This happens in around 10% of cases. An example of this is R v Counsell.

Question 17

What does the Contempt of Court Act 1981 say?

Answer 17

It is an offence to disclose any discussions in the jury room with anyone outside, like the media. e.g. Attorney General v Fraill where Fraill shared discussions with D’s girlfriend.

Question 18

What does the foreman/woman do?

Answer 18

They are one of the jurors who is elected by their fellow jurors to orchestrate discussions in the jury room and publicly announce the verdict in open court.

Question 19

What does the Juries Act 1974 say the foreman/woman must do if it is a split verdict?

Answer 19

Announce the number of jurors agreeing and disagreeing with the verdict.

Question 20

Which act allows a judge to accept a majority verdict of 11-1 or 10-2 from the jury if a unanimous verdict is not reached after 2 hours of deliberations?

Answer 20

The Criminal Justice Act 1967.

Question 21

What happens if fewer than 10 jurors are agreed?

Answer 21

It is called a ‘hung jury’ and the judge will discharge them. D will face a retrial in front of a new jury. e.g. R v Jenkins (Sion).

Question 22

What powers did the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 give to judges to try and minimise the risk of jurors researching defendants on the internet and sharing internet research with fellow jurors?

Answer 22

• They can order jurors to hand in any electronic device before they go into the jury room.
• The jury officer can strip search a juror to check for any such devices.
• It made researching a case on the internet a criminal offence.
• It also made it an offence to share researched information with fellow jurors.

Question 23

What are the advantages of juries?

Answer 23

• Public confidence
• Jury equity
• Secrecy
• Impartial and diverse

Question 24

Explain the advantage of public confidence.

Answer 24

It is a trial by peers- jury are representative of society and D so it is very democratic. They also have a wider breadth of knowledge and have different experiences to a judge and D can also challenge to the array if the jury are unrepresentative like in R v Fraser. A survery by the Law Society said that 80% of those asked would trust a jury more than a judge of magistrates and Lord Devlin referred to the jury as a ‘little Parliament’. Therefore it shows support and agreement with the justice system, leading to public respect for the law.

Question 25

Explain the advantage of jury equity.

Answer 25

Jurors can decide the verdict according to what they think is morally right and wrong, they don’t have to follow the law if they think it’s unfair. In R v Owen, the jury sympathised with D’s situation and thought he had been punished enough already so acquitted him despite overwhelming evidence he was guilty. This means juries can make fair and just decisions where a judge would have to follow the law strictly even if it would lead to a bad decision that the public wouldn’t respect.

Question 26

Explain the advantage of secrecy.

Answer 26

Contempt of Court Act 1981 makes it an offence to share discussions in the jury room and a juror received a prison sentence for doing this in Attorney General v Fraill. Bushell’s case says jurors also don’t have to give reasons for their decisions. Research shows that jurors do take their role and the standard of proof seriously, shown by acquittal rates of 60% in the Crown Court. If discussions were made public, jurors may may not be open and honest with their thoughts and feel pressured into a decision. Fewer people would want to serve as a juror as well if they thought they would be judged for a verdict. Therefore, secrecy leads to fair verdicts as jury members aren’t pressured into decisions.

Question 27

Explain the advantage of impartiality and diversity.

Answer 27

The jury are chosen randomly from the electoral register so there is a wide range of people from different backgrounds. There are 12 of them so any biases shouln’t have a major impact on the verdict and if they know anyone involved in the case, they aren’t allowed to sit, like in R v Wilson and Sprason. R v Fraser where the jury was deemed unrepresentative as it wasn’t diverse enough (challenge to the array). This means the jury is representative of society and impartial so the verdict will be a fair representation of what society wants and justice will therefore be achieved.

Question 28

What are the disadvantages of juries?

Answer 28

• Perverse decisions
• Influence of modern technology
• Secrecy
• Jury service can be unpopular

Question 29

Explain the disadvantage of perverse decisions.

Answer 29

Jury can ignore the law and evidence and base their decision on their conscience. Or they might not understand the case as they are lay people with no legal training as seen in the Vicky Pryce case where the jury asked the judge stupid questions and had to be dismissed. For example in R v Owen where D was definitely guilty but allowed to go free because the jury felt bad for him. This defeats the point of the law as the jury can just ignore it whenever they want. This could deny D the right to a fair trial which is a human right.

Question 30

Explain the disadvantage of the influence of modern technology.

Answer 30

Information about cases and defendants is widely available on the internet and may even be discussed on social networking sites. In 2010, 12% of jurors in high profile cases admitted to using the internet. This was the problem in AG v Dallas and has led to the Criminal Courts and Justice Act 2015. It is hard to stop the jury from using the internet at home even with this new Act so information on the internet may prejudice jurors and go against their oath or affirmation.

Question 31

Explain the disadvantage of secrecy.

Answer 31

Contempt of Court Act 1981 makes it an offence to share discussions in the jury room and the jury also don’t need to reveal reasons for their decisions (Bushell’s case). In R v Young, the jury used a ouija board to ask V who the killer was and then found D guilty based on this rather than any evidence in court. This means secrecy can be bad as we can’t tell if the jury are actually using the evidence to make a decision as per the oath or affirmation or are using random information or prejudices.

Question 32

Explain the disadvantage of jury service being unpopular.

Answer 32

As jury service is compulsory, this makes it unpopular with some people, especially self-employed people who may experience a loss of earnings due to their jury service. Jury service can also put a strain on jurors who have to listen to horrific evidence. Jurors in the Rosemary West case were offered counselling after the trial to help them cope with the evidence they had seen and heard. This means some jurors may rush their verdict to leave as quickly as possible, especially if they are against the whole system and are forced to listen to distressing evidence. This can lead to rushed or unfair verdicts as jurors just want to go home so don’t really care if the verdict is fair or not.