Jury timeline

R v Banks

1670

Bushell's case

Facts:

Two Quakers, Penn and Pead, decide to riot.
Judge made it clear he expected jury to find them guilty
However jury did not

1974

1985

1993

1995

1996

1997

2001

2005

2009

Juries Act

R v Ponting

R v Taylor and Taylor

R v Wilson and Sprason

R v West

R v Young

Auld Report

R v Wang

R v Karakaya

2011

R v Twomey and others

R v Banks

Ratio decidendi:
it was only when they were released on the writ of habeas corpus that it was made very clear that jurors should be able to make their own decisions without any interference from the state.

Effect on the law:
the judge must accept the jury verdict even if they do not agree with it. jurors cannot be punished for this. The jury does not give any reasons for its decisions.

Facts:
A civil servant passed on defence papers (top secret) about the sinking of an Argentinian cruiser called General Belgrano, to a labour MP named Tam Dayell. it included the details of how 700 crew members spent 30 hours in the icy, stormy waters of the Falkland's in overcrowded life rafts. The risk of death, just on trip over the edge of these flimsy and overburdened rafts.

Ratio decedendi:
The jury declared that the civil servant was not guilty as it was in the best interest of the nation that they knew what had happened as he said in his defence.

Jury equity:
The jury is not bound by any previous precedent, and does not need to give any reasons for their decisions on their idea of a fair trial.

Facts:
A Chinese political asylum seeker had his bag stolen at a train station. he found the offender, attempted to detain him, then pulled out a martial-arts sword. The police intervened, searched his bag and found a Ghurkha Kukri-style knife.

Ratio decidendi:

Court of Appeal:
They stood by decision of Crown Court because 'it is plain beyond sensible argument that the material before the jury could not in law suffice to discharge the burden'

House of Lords:
They quashed the conviction and stated that 'there are no circumstances in which a judge is entitled to direct a jury to return a verdict of guilty' because a 'belief that the jury would probably, and rightly, have convicted does not [enable a trial judge to give a direction to convict] … when there were matters which could and should have been the subject of their consideration.

Effect on the law:
it provided certainty within this area of law by providing bounds regarding how a judge can direct the jury, if at all. A judgement made in 1972 was also reversed as justified by the out come of Wang.

Facts:
The authorities charged the defendants with committing a major armed raid on warehouse near Heathrow Airport in February 2004. The defendants were originally been put on trial in 2008. However the trial was stopped after six months when two jurors had been approached (the defendants were intimidating the jurors into making the wrong judgment.

No ratio decdendi

The effect on the law:
the decision was made to hold the trial without a jury because of the fear that the defendants would try to intimidate the jury. This was forfeiting the defendants right to a fair trial.

Facts:
Mathew Banks, 19, pretended he was stick whilst working as a juror on a case, so that he could go to West End musical. He told Manchester Crown Court that he was ill when he had actually gone to London to watch Chicago. He was sent to a Your Offenders' Institution for two weeks, over Christmas. The trial was delayed, and other jurors were sent home, later carrying on in his absence.

Ratio decedendi:
Lying to the courts officials for such a frivolous reason as such a serous offence. Judge Rudland said he was jailing Banks, who could spend Christmas in prison, for contemns of courts 'with a heavy heart.'

How it is applied to the law:
Jurors are members of the public, and they don't have the same commitments as a judge or a magistrate and can't always be trusted. Their actions could lead to injustice and cause more money and time than necessary to be spent.

It provided recommendation to the criminal courts in the UK.

A defendant should no longer have the right to trial by judge and jury in either way cases (cases that can be tried in either the Magistrates' court or the Crown Court

The criminal law should be divided into 4 sections: criminal offences, criminal procedure, criminal evidence, and sentencing.

Any existing national bodies managing parts of criminal law should be replaced by the national Criminal Justice Board.