Unit 3 AC2.5 The use of laypeople in criminal cases Flashcards
Juries
Jurors are ordinary members of the public, or lay people, without legal knowledge, who decide the outcome of criminal cases. They must be:
- Between 18 and 75; have lived in the country for more than five years; have no recent criminal convictions. Names are chosen at random.
Juries - Strengths
- Juries are ordinary people and as such can bring their own ‘justice’ or fairness to a case (sometimes called jury equity).
- Even if the law is explained, a jury may provide a verdict which is contrary to the evidence.
- The public have confidence in the jury system, as the public know that these are ordinary people playing an important role in the criminal justice system.
- There are 12 people on a jury, so no one person is held responsible.
- The jury is impartial as it cannot be connected to anyone in the case and only sit as jury for two weeks, so cannot become ‘case hardened’.
Juries - Weaknesses
- Jurors do not give reasons for a verdict so perverse verdicts (ones that go against the evidence) can occur.
- There is a growing weakness in recent years for jury members to use social media and the internet during a trial, despite being told not to look up the case online, some still do which can cause bias and prejudice.
- Although jurors are ordinary people, some people have prejudices and some jurors bring these prejudices with them into a case which can produce an inaccurate verdict.
- There is no intelligence test to be a juror so some may find aspects of a case confusing.
- Jurors can be open to ‘jury nobbling’ or tampering.
Magistrates
Also known as Justices of the Peace, magistrates are lay people aged between 18-65 on appointment. However, they apply to sit in a magistrates’ court, decide if the case has been proven by the prosecution and, if so, also pass the appropriate sentence.
Magistrates - Strengths
- Magistrates are volunteers and only receive expenses, which means the lack of cost is a major advantage to the criminal justice system.
- Magistrates are lay people, therefore it allows normal everyday people to become involved in the criminal justice system (half of which are female).
- Magistrates sit in their neighbourhood and therefore have local knowledge that can be applied in cases. This allows community concerns to be acknowledged.
- Magistrates sit in threes, therefore a balanced view is more likely, a majority view prevails.
- All criminal cases start in the magsitrates’ court and 95% stay there, having been dealt with by unpaid volunteers.
Magistrates - Weaknesses
- One of the main weaknesses is the inconsistency in sentencing. Varying sentences have been known to have been passed for the same offences.
- Magistrates are criticised as being middle aged and middle class, as a large majority of magistrates are retired from a professional or managerial background.
- Despite training to prevent this happening, magistrates have also been accused of being prosecution-based with a tendency to believe police evidence.
- Magistrates may see the same prosecutor on a regular basis and this could affect their judgement.
- If they sit on a regular basis they may also become case hardened.
Jury Equity
Jury Equity – A jury can bring in a verdict that is morally right rather than one that complies with the law and previous cases.
Perverse
Perverse – contrary to the accepted or expected standard or practice.
Jury Nobbling
Jury Nobbling – refers to the actual or attempted influence of one or morejurymembers through intimidation or inducement.
Sentencing
Sentencing – declare the punishment decided for (an offender).
Judiciary
Judiciary – the judicial authorities of a country; judges collectively.
Clerk
Clerk – a person employed in an office or bank to keep records, accounts, and undertake other routine administrative duties.
Inconsistency
Inconsistency – not compatible or in keeping with.
Criticised
Criticised - indicate the faults of (someone or something) in a disapproving way.
