the juries

Question 1

give a brief history of juries

Answer 1

came to britian following the normal conquest
acted as witnesses
magna carta - trial by peers
henry ii - birth of common law

Question 2

what does bushells case show

Answer 2

signifies the independence of the jury, a judge cannot challenge a juries decision

bushell - jury refused to find men guilty, judge threatened to have them locked up but they still didnt, ruled that the judge could not punish for a verdict he did not like

further seen in r v mckenna

Question 3

what are jury qualifications?

Answer 3

account for around 2% of criminal trials
juries act 1974
aged between 18 - 75
registered to vote
resident for at least 5 years since 13th birthday

Question 4

what are jury disqualifications?

Answer 4

permanently disqualified if:
been sentenced to imprisonment to life
imprisonment for public protection
an extended sentence
term of imprisonment of 5 years or more
currently on bail
mental disorders = lives in hospital or regular guardianship

Question 5

is there a right to be excused?

Answer 5

as of 2004, there is no ‘right to be excused’ (except members of the forces)
the criminal justice act 2003 introduced discretionary excusal instead
can apply to excuse/defer your jury services if needed, will only do this if it is sufficiently appropriate
would be pushed back, not absolute excusal
they may be fined up to £1000.

Question 6

are police and lawyers excused?

Answer 6

they were until 2003. they are now eligible to serve on a jury, unless they are working at the police station/ have a connection like cps.

Question 7

Hanif v UK

Answer 7

police officer was selected as a juror, and alerted them that he knew on of the prosecution police witnesses, but it did not matter

Question 8

can judges sit on a jury

Answer 8

following the 2004 change, judges can also sit on a jury, they are sitting as a private citizen
excusal will only be granted in extreme circumstances
deferrals can be made
they can choose whether to tell other members of the jury their profession or not.
they must follow the directions given by the trial judge, even if they dont agree with this

Question 9

what are the exemptions to being on the jury

Answer 9

lack of capacity i.e. not being able to speak english or a disability
having a disability doesn’t automatically exempt you
a deaf person legally cannot be a juror as only 12 people are allowed in the jury room

Question 10

how are juries selected?

Answer 10

names are chosen randomly from the electoral register
for bigger courts, up to 150 summonses are sent each fortnight.
expected to complete two weeks of jury service
may be asked beforehand if they will be able to sit for longer

Question 11

how are jurors vetted?

Answer 11

police checks
wider background check

Question 11

what is checked in a wider background check?

Answer 11

checks their background and political affiliations
should only be used when:
cases involving national security where part of evidence will be given on camera
terrorist cases
attorney general express permission

court clerk will select a random 12 of 15

Question 12

why are jurors checked through police checks

Answer 12

court of appeal declared it was unconstitutional
hpwever, the case of r v mason approved betting because its a criminal offence to serve on a jury while disqualified, they have a right to check this

Question 13

what are the 3 ways that the prosecution/defence can challenge the jurors?

Answer 13

1) to the array - challenge jury as a whole because it is unrepresentative/bias
2) for cause = challenging an individual for a valid reason - related/disqualified
3) prosecutions right to stand by jurors = put a certain juror at the end of the queue, only to be used sparingly

Question 14

what is the split function of the judiciary?

Answer 14

the judge and the jury
judge decides on points of law and jury decides on the facts
judge can direct the jury to acquit the defendant if there is no case
direct acquittal ^
if case continues, jury hears the case and retires to a private room to come to an unanimous decision

Question 15

what is a majority verdict?

Answer 15

After 2 hours, and the jury hasn’t reached a verdict, the judge can call it back to the courtroom and accept a majority verdict.
10:2 or 11:1 is allowed since 1967.
A jury cannot go below 9 people. If there are 9 for any reason, unanimous decision has to be made.
Majority verdicts introduced to combat nobbling.
Defendants would try to bribe 1 juror to make the verdict not unanimous and unable to reach a decision.
20% per year majority verdict.

Question 16

how is the jury secret?

Answer 16

Jury discussion is in secret.
No inquiry into how the jury reached its decision.
Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 – illegal to discuss jury decisions.
Disclosure is allowed where it is in the interests of justice, such as reporting juror misconduct.

Question 17

what are the advantages of a jury?

Answer 17

Public confidence in the jury – fundamental part of society that has existed for hundreds of years.
Jury equity – decide cases on ‘fairness’, not bound by precedent etc.
Open system of justice – keep the law clear, have to explain it to the juries.
Secrecy of the jury room – jury is free from pressure and protected from outside influences.
Impartiality – not connected to anyone in the case. Should cancel out each other’s biases.

Ponting’s Case (1984):
Civil servant was charged for leaking information on the sinking of a ship in the Falklands War. Pleaded not guilty, jury refused to convict even though there was no defence.

Question 18

Pontings case

Answer 18

Civil servant was charged for leaking information on the sinking of a ship in the Falklands War. Pleaded not guilty, jury refused to convict even though there was no defence.

jury

Question 19

what are the disadvantages of a jury?

Answer 19

Perverse decisions – decisions that are not justified. Refusing to convict when there is clear evidence:
R v Randle and Pottle (1991):
Defendants charged with helping someone escape from prison. Prosecution didn’t occur until 25 years after the escape, when they wrote about what they had done. The jury found them not guilty though, possibly as a protest of the time lapse of prosecution.
Secrecy – no way of knowing if the jury understood the case etc.
R v Mirza and R v Connor and Rollock are authority for the fact that a court cannot inquire into discussions in a jury room.
Except:
If there has been a complete repudiation of the oath taken by the jurors to try the case according to the evidence (i.e. they used something else, not the evidence, to come to their decision. OR
Extraneous material has been introduced into the jury room.
e.g. R v Young (Stephen):
Used a Ouija board in the hotel overnight during deliberations to come to a guilty verdict. Case was quashed and retrial had.

Question 20

R v Randle and Pottle:

Answer 20

Defendants charged with helping someone escape from prison. Prosecution didn’t occur until 25 years after the escape, when they wrote about what they had done. The jury found them not guilty though, possibly as a protest of the time lapse of prosecution.

Question 21

R v Mirza and R v Connor and Rollock

Answer 21

are authority for the fact that a court cannot inquire into discussions in a jury room.
secrecy - disadvantahes

Question 22

R v Young

Answer 22

Used a Ouija board in the hotel overnight during deliberations to come to a guilty verdict. Case was quashed and retrial had.
secrecy - complete retrial

Question 23

How may the internet affect a jury?

Answer 23

Judges direct jurors not to look at the internet.
12% do.
may have preconceptions
Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015 has made it illegal to search the internet for information surrounding the case.

Question 24

how may the jury be biased and how is this countered?

Answer 24

Some jurors may still have prejudices against certain people. We try to counter this with having 12 people. E.g. some people are biased against the police – why certain people with certain convictions can’t sit on a jury. Some people may have prejudices against certain races. Try to counter this through our vetting processes. Sander v United Kingdom: One juror had written a note to the judge raising concerns over other jurors being racist. Another two letters were sent the next day. Jurors saying they hadn’t been racist and one saying he had. Despite this, the judge allowed the case to continue. ECHR held that the jury should’ve been discharged because of racial bias.

Question 25

Sander v United Kingdom:

Answer 25

One juror had written a note to the judge raising concerns over other jurors being racist. Another two letters were sent the next day. Jurors saying they hadn’t been racist and one saying he had. Despite this, the judge allowed the case to continue. ECHR held that the jury should’ve been discharged because of racial bias.

Question 26

R v Taylor and Taylor:

Answer 26

Media influence is especially prevalent in high-profile cases. E.g. R v Taylor and Taylor: Two sisters charged with murder. Some newspapers posted still photos taken from a video which gave a false impression of what was happening. After the jury convicted the sisters, the judge gave leave to appeal because of the possible influence the picture could’ve had on the jury’s verdict and the Court of Appeal actually quashed the convictions.

Question 27

what did studies show about a jurys lack of understanding

Answer 27

Studies showed that only 31% of the jurors had actually understood the case facts, despite two thirds stating that they understood. After the written summary, 48% fully understood the case facts. This is especially true in fraud trials because they are complex.

Question 28

how could the jury be tampered?

Answer 28

Friends of the defendant may try to interfere with the jury. bribing/threatening. Police may be used to try and protect the jurors. If there is an effort to tamper with a jury, prosecution can apply for the trial to be heard by the judge alone. First trial approved without a jury was R v Twomey and others (2009): Defendants charged with various offences related to robbery. Three previous trials had collapsed and there had been a serious attempt at jury tampering in the last of these. Prosecution applied for single judge to hear it. Judge refused but Court of Appeal granted this.

Question 29

R v Twomey and others:

Answer 29

First trial approved without a jury was R v Twomey and others (2009): Defendants charged with various offences related to robbery. Three previous trials had collapsed and there had been a serious attempt at jury tampering in the last of these. Prosecution applied for single judge to hear it. Judge refused but Court of Appeal granted this.

Question 30

what is a problem with jury acquittals?

Answer 30

They acquit too many defendants. 60% of those who plead not guilty at the Crown Court are acquitted. This includes cases discharged by judge and where an acquittal is directed. When these are discounted, less than 40% were actually acquitted.

Question 31

do all juries agree to jury service?

Answer 31

Some jurors don’t agree with compulsory jury service. Some jurors may be against the whole system. Others may rush their verdict so they can leave.

Question 32

are juries diverse?

Answer 32

Both magistrates and juries use members of the community in making decisions. A wider cross-section of society is used compared to if just judges were used. Better balance of men and women. More involvement of ethnic minorities too. However, Magistrates are still seen as middle-classed and middle-aged. Juries have more of a variety. Jurors are from more of a cross-section of the local society.

Question 33

Do juries or magistrates save any money?

Answer 33

Use of unpaid lay magistrates is cheap. To replace them with paid judges is estimated to cost around £100 million per year. Cost of a trial in magistrates is cheaper than in Crown court. Juries don’t save money as there is also a judge present. Having a jury actually adds to the length of a case and therefore the cost too.

Question 34

how are jurors trained in comparison to magistrates?

Answer 34

Magistrates are trained sufficiently. Majority of decisions they need to make are common sense rather than stem from professional training. Jurors have no training and often have to sit in complicated trials. Jurors therefore often do not understand the trial they are sitting in.

Question 35

what are the alternatives to a jury?

Answer 35

Trial by a single judge: This is what happens in the majority of civil cases. There is less public confidence in the use of judges to decide in criminal cases. The argument is that judges become case-hardened and prosecution-minded. Judges tend to be more upper class too, meaning they aren’t understanding of people’s backgrounds/problems. There’s no other personalities to eliminate the bias too. However, judges are trained to evaluate cases and training in racial awareness. A Panel of Judges: Some countries have a group of 3-5 judges hearing a case. This allows for a balance of views. Doesn’t eliminate all the issues we have with judges though. We don’t have sufficient judges in the system for this. Expensive too. A mini-jury: Could have a smaller number of jurors. Many countries, such as Spain, have 9 jurors. A jury of 6 could be used for less serious criminal offences, as in some American states. A judge plus Lay Assessors: The judge and two lay people make the decision together. Used in Scandinavian countries. Provides the best of both.

Question 36

what is a trial by single jury?

Answer 36

This is what happens in the majority of civil cases. There is less public confidence in the use of judges to decide in criminal cases. The argument is that judges become case-hardened and prosecution-minded. Judges tend to be more upper class too, meaning they aren’t understanding of people’s backgrounds/problems. There’s no other personalities to eliminate the bias too. However, judges are trained to evaluate cases and training in racial awareness.

Question 37

what is a panel of judges?

Answer 37

Some countries have a group of 3-5 judges hearing a case. This allows for a balance of views. Doesn’t eliminate all the issues we have with judges though. We don’t have sufficient judges in the system for this. Expensive too.

Question 38

what is a judge plus lay assessors?

Answer 38

The judge and two lay people make the decision together. Used in Scandinavian countries. Provides the best of both.

Question 39

what is a mini jury?

Answer 39

A mini-jury: Could have a smaller number of jurors. Many countries, such as Spain, have 9 jurors. A jury of 6 could be used for less serious criminal offences, as in some American states.