Selecting a jury

Question 1

Who is responsible for selecting a jury?

Answer 1

at each Crown Court there is an official who is responsible for summonsing enough jurors to try the cases that will be heard in every 2 week period

Question 2

How will the official at the Crown Court, who is responsible for summonsing enough jurors to try the cases heard in every 2 week period ,select?

Answer 2

official will arrange for names to be selected at random from the electoral register for the area it covers through a computer selection at a central office

Question 3

How many will the official at the Crown Court summon for jury service?

Answer 3

always more than 12 jurors as most courts have more than one courtroom and it will not be known how many of those summonsed are disqualified or will be excused

Question 4

In bigger courts, how many people will be summonsed each fortnight?

Answer 4

150

Question 5

How long are those summonsed expected to attend jury service?

Answer 5

2 weeks , unless the trial foes on for more then 2 weeks and so will have to stay until the trial is completed

Question 6

Where it is known that a trial may be exceptionally long, such as a complicated fraud trial , what are potential jurors asked?

Answer 6

if they will be able to serve for such a long period

Question 7

once the potential jurors are known , who are allowed access to the list?

Answer 7

the prosecution and defence

Question 8

It can be decided for potential jurors to be ‘vetted’ to check for suitability.
What are the two types of vetting?

Answer 8

• routine police checks

- wider background checks

Question 9

Why are routine police checks used?

Answer 9

Routine police checks are made on prospective jurors to eliminate those disqualified

Question 10

In what case was a routine police check used?

Answer 10

R v Mason

Question 11

In R v Mason, what did the Court of Appeal rule?

Answer 11

that the police were only doing their normal duty of preventing crime by checking for criminal records

Question 12

What case brought out the practise of a wider check of a jurors background and political affiliations?

Answer 12

the ‘ABC’ trial in 1978

Question 13

What happened in the ‘ABC’ trial in 1978 which brought in the practise of a wider check of a jurors background and political affiliations?

Answer 13

two journalists and a soldier were charged with collecting secret information. Jury had been vetted for their loyalty. Trial was stopped and a new trial ordered a fresh jury.
As a result, the Attorney General published guidelines on when political vetting of jurors should take place

Question 14

What happened as a result of the ABC trial in 1978?

Answer 14

The Attorney General published guidelines on when political vetting of jurors should take place

Question 15

What were the guidelines stated by the Attorney General after the ABC trial in 1978? (2)

Answer 15

a) vetting should only be used in exceptional circumstances
i) involving national security where part of the evidence is likely to be given in camera
ii) terrorist cases
b) vetting can only be carried out with the Attorney Generals express permission

Question 16

During selection at court, how many jurors are divided and allocated to a court each?

Answer 16

15

Question 17

At the start of the trial, who selects the 12 out of the 15 allocated to a court?

Answer 17

the court clerk at random

Question 18

On arrival at the court, what are the jurors shown and what does this tell them?

Answer 18

Jurors are shown a DVD explaining the layout of the court and procedure & how to behave such as not discussing the case with other people

Question 19

After the court clerk has selected the panel of 12 jurors, they are sworn in as jurors in the jury box. However, before they are sworn in, what does the prosecution and defence have the right to ?

Answer 19

have certain rights to challenge one or more of the prosecutors

Question 20

What are the 2 rights of the defence and prosecution as well as the extra special right of the prosecution to challenge the jurors?

Answer 20

• to the array
• for cause
• prosecution right to stand by jurors

Question 21

what is ‘to the array’?

Answer 21

this is a right to challenge the whole jury on the basis that it has been chosen in an unrepresentative or biased way

Question 22

What power allows the challenge ‘to the array’?

Answer 22

s.5 of the Juries Act 1974

Question 23

When was the challenge ‘to the array’ under s.5 of the Juries Act 1974 successful ?why?

Answer 23

the challenge ‘to the array’ was successful against ‘Romford’ jury at the Old Bailey in 1993 when 9 out of 12 jurors came from Romford , 2 of them living within 20 doors of each other in the same street

Question 24

What happened in R v Fraser 1987 in relation to the challenge ‘to the array’?

Answer 24

the defendant was of an ethnic minority background buy all jurors were white . Judge empanelled another jury.

Question 25

What happened in R v Ford 1989, in contrast to R v Fraser 1987?

Answer 25

it was held that if the jury was chosen in a random manner then it could not be challenged due to it not being multi-racial

Question 26

What is the challenge ‘for cause’ which is available to the prosecution and defence ?

Answer 26

this involves challenging the right of an individual juror to sit on the jury.

Question 27

How can the challenge ‘for cause’ be successful?

Answer 27

the challenge must point out a vlid reason why that juror shelled not serve on the jury such as disqualification, of related to a witness or defendant

Question 28

What overall happened in R v Wilson and R v Sprason 1995?

Answer 28

a wife of a prison officer was on the jury after asking to be excused and refused. Court of Appeal later rule that justice was not seen to be done and so the convictions had to be quashed

Question 29

What is Prosecution right to stand by jurors?

Answer 29

This is a right which allows the juror who has been stood by to put to the end of the list of potential jurors so that they will not be used on the jury unless there are not enough other jurors

Question 30

how can the prosecution have the right to stand by jurors?

Answer 30

the prosecution does not have to give a reason for ‘standing by’ but the Attorney Generals guidelines make it clear that this power should be used sparingly