Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Juries - Coggle Diagram
Juries
Advantages
Jury Equity:
Jurors not legal experts, so they aren't bound to follow precedents or acts of parliament as they do not have to give a reason for the decision.
Ponting (1984)- Civil servant charged with leaking info on a sinking ship, under S2 of the Official Secrets Act 1991- jury refused to convict even though the judge said that there was no defence.
Secrecy in the jury room:
Jury can remain in secret and there is no enquiry of findings. Free from pressure, can bring in unpopular verdicts and allows jurors to ignore the strict letter of the law.
Criminal Justice Act 2015- Judge has the right to have the juries phone and made it illegal to discuss the case with anyone outside the jury.
Public confidence:
The public have great levels of confidence with the justice system as there are 12 strangers deciding upon the facts of the case to come to a majority verdict. The right to be tried by ones peers is a bastion of liberty, meaning freedom is met.
Lord Devlin - 'Juries are the lamp that shows freedom lives'
Impartiality:
Due to the random selection of jurors this will lead to a cross-section of society being represented in the jury room. This should also lead to impartiality. No one juror is responsible for the outcome and therefore, any bias may not impact the final outcome too heavily.
Open System of justice:
The use of a jury is viewed as making the legal system more open. Justice is seen to be done as members of the public are involved in a key role and the whole process is public. It also helps to keep the law clearer as points have to be explained to the jury, enabling the defendant to understand the case more easily.
Disadvantages
Perverse decisions:
Evidence and facts can be ignored by the jury and it can give a wrong decision.
R v Randle & Pottle (1991)- Jury acquitted the d who was helping a spy escape as a protest over the time-lapse of the prosecution and the offence.
R v Kronlid and others (1996)- caused damage to plane- stop attack
Secrecy:
No reasons have to be given for the verdict, so we do not know if the jury understood the case and made the decision for the right reason.
R v Mirza (2004)- the court held that you cannot inquire in discussions in a jury room. This was supported in R v Connor & Rollock (2004)
Exception: R v Young (1995)- hotel- ouija board- talking too the victims- guilty- quashed
Media influence:
Media coverage may influence jurors, especially true in high profile cases, where there has been a lot of publicity about police investigations.
R v Taylor & Taylor- released two images of the defendants. The judge saw that this would have an influence on the jury- conviction for the murder was quashed.
Jury tampering:
Friends of the defendant may try to interfere with the jury. Bribing the jury- making threats- police may have to protect them.
S44 of the CJA 2003- already meen and attempt to tamper, they can apply for the case too be heard by a judge.
R v Twomey & others 2009- Three trials collapsed due to jury tampering. A single judge was applied for to hear the case but was rejected. The COA overturned the decision and made one
Racial bias or general bias:
Jurors have no direct interest in the case. There may be certain biases. e.g. against the police. There may also be certain jurors who are racially prejudiced.
Sander V UK 2000- written note over concerns that they had been making openly racist comments. European Courts of Human Rights held that the judge should have discharged the jury as their was racial bias and a breach to a fair trail. Under Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Jury Challenge
For Cause:
Challanging the right of an individual to sit. Must hold a valid point/reason why they should not sit. E.g. disqualification, related to a witness or defendent.
To Array:
Given under S5 Juries Act 1974, challenge the whole jury on the basis that they have been chosen in a bias or unrepresentative way. Used in R v Ford (1989)- choose randomly so could not challenge the multi-racial aspect.
Stand by the jurors/crown:
Only prosecution can do this- juror who has stood by can be put at the end of the list for potential jurors, so they will not be called unless they don't have enough jurors.
Do not have to give a reason for this.
How are they selected?
Qualifications
Disqualifications
Discretionary excusals
Full-time members of the forces
Section 9 JA (1974) gave discretion if their is a good reason such as:
being ill, business requirements, booked holidays, Exams, disability, new mom.
Under CJA 2003 judges, lawyers and police are eligible
Life imprisonment, imprisonment for public protection, prison term for 5 years or more.
Disqualified for 10 years:
Served any sentence, on bail. If you dont disclose this it could lead to an £5000 fine.
Mentally disordered persons:
Suffer from a mental illness or handicap and have to have hospital treatment or on going treatment.
Set under the Juries Act 1974
Aged between 18 and 75
Registered on the electoral role
Resident of the UK and channel island for at least 5 years since their 13th birthday.
Names selected at random from the electoral register. This is done on a computer system. It will summon more than 12 jurors as the court will usually need more than one set of jurors needed.
Role of the Jury:
Used in 2% of CC cases
Jury listen to evidence set out
They then discuss in secret, will decide if they are guilty or not guilty.
Unanimous decision preferred, majority decision allowed.
No reason for decision needs to be given
Role in criminal cases:
Split fuction:
The judge decides the point of law and the jury decides the facts. The judge has the power to direct the jury to acquit the defendant.
Judge sums up the case and jury go to a private room to discuss.
What is a jury?
A jury in a criminal trial is the sole decider of guilt or innocence.
Bushell (1670) jurors refused to convict but the trail judge would not accept this and made them come to a deliberation. They would not change there mind so had to pay a fine so they could leave. An appeal meant they had to be released.