Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Juries - Coggle Diagram
Juries
Selection
-
-
- Summoned to be part of the jury in waiting
- Speaks to jury officer, advises who may be eligible
- Actual jury selected randomly in open court, from panel of 15
- Challenge of juror- Stand for the Crown
Challenge to the polls
- Suitability
- Vetted or known personally
Challenge to the array
- Challenging the compilation of the jury
- Romford Jury, Old Bailey 1993
- Swears oath or affirmation if not religious
- Only judges can discharge, may be discharged
Weaknesses
- Absurd or hung juries
R v Owen
- Secrecy can cover up poor decision making
R v Young- used a ouija board to come to a conclusion
- Juror may be biased
Sander v UK- racial profiling
- Law may be confusing and too complex for jurors
- Hard to avoid media coverage, so may be bias
R v West
- Can a police officer be bias
- Are more likely to acquit than magistrates
60% compared to 20% of magistrates
Work
- Listening to evidence and submissions from advocates
- Listening to judges summing up cases
- Secret discussion with other jurors
Contempt of Court Act 1981
- Unanimous or majority verdict of 10:2
- Verdict beyond reasonable doubt
- Foreman's public announcement of the verdict
Qualification
-
- From electoral register by Central Summoning Bureau
- Set out in Juries Act 1974
- Resident in UK for at least 5 years since age 13
Criminal Justice Act 2013
- any profession can be a juror
Disqualification
-
- Treatment for mental illness
- Custodial sentence of 5+ years= life ban
- Any custodial sentence/community service leads to 10 year ban
-
Strengths:
-
- Not restricted by legal rule
R v Ponting- conviction of legal aid leaking secret documents, jury were working for benefit of national security
R v Wang- judge is not entitled to influence jury to return a guilty verdict
- Just for the people by the people
Lord Devlin 'Lamp that shows that freedom lives'
- Secrecy
Contempt of Court Act 1981
- Confidence in jury
-