Ive just finished almost two weeks on Jury service and it was one of the most fascinating things i have ever been involved in. I thought I would share some of the events.
After hearing stories of people spending hours and days waiting around I was very happy to called into a courtroom on the first morning and then intrigued to be sworn in on a murder trial.
We heard the Prosecution witnesses and evidence then later in the week the Defence began their case, again with witnesses and other evidence. This involved the only other actual witness, attending paramedics, various Police officers, CSI's then onto Pathologists, Forensic experts and interpreters. All the attending witnesses were of course cross examined by the relevant barristers.
The next stage was the Prosecution and Defence barristers closed there cases (which was quite theatrical and like watching an actor) and the Judge completed the summing up.
The Jury then retired and I offered to be the Foreman expecting other people to volunteer but no one else did so I was voted in! After deliberating and reviwing the evidence we unanamously cleared him of murder and discussed again but could not get a unanimous verdict on manslaugher. We went back in court and i stood up and was asked the verdict on murder and i told the court not guilty then said no to a decision on manslaughter. The judge then stated he would accept a 10-2 majority so we went back to deliberations.
Yesterday afternoon we acheived the required majority and went back into court and i again stood up and told the court a not guilty verdict at which point the trial ended and the defendant was free to leave court.
I learnt a lot about the whole legal system and about myslelf and in a way other people. As a juror you can only consider your verdict on the evidence given or told to you. We spent hours arguing whther it was accidental or self defence and then if it was lawful self defence. You have to ignore any theories, possibilities or especially in this case prejudices and just use the evidence. In this case the evidence could not prove any excessive force so we had to acquit the defendant. This was hard to take for one juror who firmly believed in "an eye for an eye" and would not accept anything else.
You also have to understand the context of terminology. The fatal wound was caused by a sharp pointed object piercing the skin then travelling 18cm into the body. This is termed a stab wound but the word stab has certain connotations and you can immediately think its a violent and aggressive in nature.
In the end the Prosecution evidence was pretty weak and there was a few glaring mistakes especially in the forensic side of things. Their were knives recovered but only one was forensically tested and that was bigger than the wound was dismissed by both pathologists. The knife used was identified bt never tested!
I can say that if given the oppurtunity again i would love to do it again but the one thing we all agreed on was its nothing like on the TV!
Disclaimer- all the above is public knowledge and no specifics or confidential details have been mentioned.
After hearing stories of people spending hours and days waiting around I was very happy to called into a courtroom on the first morning and then intrigued to be sworn in on a murder trial.
We heard the Prosecution witnesses and evidence then later in the week the Defence began their case, again with witnesses and other evidence. This involved the only other actual witness, attending paramedics, various Police officers, CSI's then onto Pathologists, Forensic experts and interpreters. All the attending witnesses were of course cross examined by the relevant barristers.
The next stage was the Prosecution and Defence barristers closed there cases (which was quite theatrical and like watching an actor) and the Judge completed the summing up.
The Jury then retired and I offered to be the Foreman expecting other people to volunteer but no one else did so I was voted in! After deliberating and reviwing the evidence we unanamously cleared him of murder and discussed again but could not get a unanimous verdict on manslaugher. We went back in court and i stood up and was asked the verdict on murder and i told the court not guilty then said no to a decision on manslaughter. The judge then stated he would accept a 10-2 majority so we went back to deliberations.
Yesterday afternoon we acheived the required majority and went back into court and i again stood up and told the court a not guilty verdict at which point the trial ended and the defendant was free to leave court.
I learnt a lot about the whole legal system and about myslelf and in a way other people. As a juror you can only consider your verdict on the evidence given or told to you. We spent hours arguing whther it was accidental or self defence and then if it was lawful self defence. You have to ignore any theories, possibilities or especially in this case prejudices and just use the evidence. In this case the evidence could not prove any excessive force so we had to acquit the defendant. This was hard to take for one juror who firmly believed in "an eye for an eye" and would not accept anything else.
You also have to understand the context of terminology. The fatal wound was caused by a sharp pointed object piercing the skin then travelling 18cm into the body. This is termed a stab wound but the word stab has certain connotations and you can immediately think its a violent and aggressive in nature.
In the end the Prosecution evidence was pretty weak and there was a few glaring mistakes especially in the forensic side of things. Their were knives recovered but only one was forensically tested and that was bigger than the wound was dismissed by both pathologists. The knife used was identified bt never tested!
I can say that if given the oppurtunity again i would love to do it again but the one thing we all agreed on was its nothing like on the TV!
Disclaimer- all the above is public knowledge and no specifics or confidential details have been mentioned.
). All the defendants were found guilty, but I wouldn't go into why on here.