Jury Service

[Abraham]

They are looking at the Jury system in Scotland for things like this. It all kicked off after an accused walked free from court as a jury cleared him of assault against Neil Lennon even though it was caught on National TV coverage and he admitted the assault but denied any sectarian element. He actually stated he would plead guilty to Assault.

The prosecution would not drop the sectarian element off the charge and so, instead of finding him guilty of Assault and dropping the sectarian element themselves they cleared him of all charges.

Because of this, some legal professionals are asking for certain tests to be put in place to determine suitability for jury duty.

I can only assume that in this case being unsuitable meant being of the wrong religion maybe? The jury only get to decide guilty or not guilty of what they're asked, they cannot suggest a new charge for the prosecution to level. I really don't see how this is a sign of a flaw in the jury system, just sounds like poor prosecution.

It's a very clear example of the limited power of a jury and the preciseness to which they have to act. Usually the judge will make clear what it boils down to as to whether they're guilty or not of the charge levelled at them. In a case I sat on it was an assault charge, and while everyone in the jury agreed the "victim" was probably more at fault and could also have been charged, by the letter of the law the defendant was guilty.

 

[Dunks]

You can't really ask that. The OP was there to hear all the evidence, we weren't. You can't talk about the specifics of a case outside court.

Wouldn't anyone sitting in the public gallery have the same exposure to the evidence/court as the OP?

 

[Tummy]

My mum did Jury service on a murder trial, said it was fascinating, it was quite high profile and lasted ages though. She found it to be quite draining and due to the content of the trial everyone was offered a appointment with a doctor if they needed it.

This was hard to take for one juror who firmly believed in "an eye for an eye" and would not accept anything else.

Isn't that most of this forum?

I mean, most of this forum would put a man to death / in a microwave for cat abuse

 

[Monkeymatt]

Wouldn't anyone sitting in the public gallery have the same exposure to the evidence/court as the OP?

It's like Vegas, what happens in court stays in court.

Atleast that is how I thought it was supposed to happen.

 

[Ahleckz]

You get sent a start date as much as 8 - 10 months beforehand and you can defer that to another date but only once.

On your first day all new jurors are shown a video and given details about costs and expenses then the waiting starts. At the start of a new case 15 people are called and they are taken down to the court. At this time all relevant people are already in court and then the Clerk has cards with all 15 peoples names on. They shuffle and call out 12 people who then sit in the jury seats. Then the Clerk tells the court the indictment and how long the case may take. At this time a jurer in waiting may speak to the Judge if they have any association with the defendant or reasons to reject the case, an example was one jurer worked in a local prison but was ok to remain. Next the defendant (via his council) can reject a jurer. If all is ok the 3 remaining people return back to the waiting area for another case and the 12 jurers are sworn in.

You were lucky.

At my one, I went to the court (can't remember how much notice I got) and there were 30 people there. We sat in a waiting room for a while, before going through to a court and got a talk from a clerk about what would be happening. After this we were taken back to the waiting room and watched a video and then Jeremy Kyle was put on. Hours of waiting, and then just before lunch a clerk came back and told us that the jurors would be chosen after lunch and we'd get under way. Came back from lunch, and were told there were further delays. We were then sent home at around 3.
Same thing happened the next couple of days, with us getting sent home after a couple of hours or we had to wait for most of the day.
On the 4th day, the Thursday, we were assured the jurors were getting selected that day. Then someone key to the case didn't turn up so we couldn't go ahead. We were sent home, with assurances that if there were further delays on the Friday we'd be reassigned. (Bear in mind there are still 30 people here at this point!).
Friday morning, turned up, sat for about 30 minutes and then a clerk came in and told us we were free to go home as the defendant had pleaded guilty.
A right ballache, but part of my civic duty so I was happy to do it.

 

[Abraham]

It's like Vegas, what happens in court stays in court.

Atleast that is how I thought it was supposed to happen.

You shouldn't talk about it while the verdict is still pending, as it could influence your decision by someone not having all of the facts available to them. You're also not meant to research anything yourself as it's not evidence presented in the court.

Afterwards there's very little harm in discussing a case, as generally it could be in the public domain anyway. The not talking about it is to prevent the juror being influenced, not to prevent the public knowing about it.

 

[Jay794]

Isn't it illegal to discuss court happenings outside of the court room? Can't this thread get you in trouble?

 

[Nightglow]

I missed my chance of jury service 20 years ago.
Had a accident, was in hospital recovering, when one day two coppers & some other bod turned up & executed a warrant for my arrest for failing to turn up at court for jury service.

They had to leave empty handed, as the sister refused to allow my removal.

 

[Ahleckz]

Isn't it illegal to discuss court happenings outside of the court room? Can't this thread get you in trouble?

Depends what he says, you can speak about some things but not everything no matter how long has passed (what goes on in the jury room is usually off limits). You can be charged with contempt of court and imprisoned.

 

[Abraham]

Depends what he says, you can speak about some things but not everything no matter how long has passed (what goes on in the jury room is usually off limits). You can be charged with contempt of court and imprisoned.

I did mean to say what's discussed in the court room, as like I say that could be public record. This is correct that what's discussed in the jury room isn't meant to be discussed outside of the jury room, to anyone.

 

[pdw8]

I did mean to say what's discussed in the court room, as like I say that could be public record. This is correct that what's discussed in the jury room isn't meant to be discussed outside of the jury room, to anyone.

I can safely assume that anything spoken about or shown in court is public knowledge due to the public gallery and the fact journalists are present. What i cannot discuss is any specifics and evidence that was not public like documents and photographs.
Obvoulsy the case is over so if this post was mid case then thats a serious issue and could be up for contempt myself.

What has struck me is since the end of the case ive seen some of the press reports and they are pretty badly written and alsmost assume guilt. One headline was "man cleared of stabbing murder"

 

[Le_Petit_Lapin]

I found my Jury service to mostly be sitting around reading a book.

 

[idiocious]

I just spent Monday to Thursday being a juror on a rather trivial trial. There were 7 witnesses in total but the trial took 4 days nonetheless. Like the OP, none of the 14 other jurors wanted to be the foreman so I offered up my services. It surprised me as I was the youngest in the jury by a good ~7 years. I'm not so sure what's difficult or daunting about standing up and saying a few words in the court but I guess people have their reasons.

It was a fascinating experience and I'd happily do it again if it doesn't clash with any events that I have going at the time. I will admit though that it can get awfully boring especially when a lot of legal matters crop up causing the jury to have to leave the court for anywhere from 10 mins to several hours!

 

[ash_scotland88]

You get sent a start date as much as 8 - 10 months beforehand and you can defer that to another date but only once.

On your first day all new jurors are shown a video and given details about costs and expenses then the waiting starts. At the start of a new case 15 people are called and they are taken down to the court. At this time all relevant people are already in court and then the Clerk has cards with all 15 peoples names on. They shuffle and call out 12 people who then sit in the jury seats. Then the Clerk tells the court the indictment and how long the case may take. At this time a jurer in waiting may speak to the Judge if they have any association with the defendant or reasons to reject the case, an example was one jurer worked in a local prison but was ok to remain. Next the defendant (via his council) can reject a jurer. If all is ok the 3 remaining people return back to the waiting area for another case and the 12 jurers are sworn in.

Thanks, I remember reading the first letter you get about Jury service around 18, but declined to being a student or something. Had a letter recently in saying I had to give details etc but not sure what I did the hand-out, but I think that was only containing the clauses making you alledgable to get get out of jury service.
I also remember snippets of the court being able to be costs, and wages...or maybe it was stating that legally your company still has to pay your wage...which must suck if your self employed in a one man business?

 

[wez130]

I did jury service 6 months after my 18th birthday 26 years ago. It was a great experience, 2 weeks 3 trails and just 1 day not on a jury, and I'd love to do it as a full time job. Even though i was an 18 year old idiot, as opposed to a 44 year old idiot now, I felt I did it responsibly.

Hopefully, one day, I will be called up to do my civic duty again. And no, I can't understand why people would want to get out of it.

sounds exactly the same as my experience, i had 3 cases but i don't think there was a day i wasn't in a case in the 2 weeks. I too loved it and would love to do it again!

 

[Red_knight]

re: Pay.

Your company has to give you time off. They don't have to pay you. If they don't pay you, they have to fill in a loss of earnings form for you to take to the court. (If you're self-employed and can't/don't defer you have to do your own form and prove earnings). The court then pays you depending on whether it was a full or half day and how long the case has been going on for - they don't have to match your salary - they pay up to a certain amount each day.

 

[Pate]

I guess I wouldn't mind doing it, as along as it wasn't something very distasteful.

 

[feriso]

I've not done any yet, always been curious about doing it though. I remember my Dad saying he's been on twice, once for a fraud case and I think the other was assault. The nearest I've been to a court case is the witness in a driver knocking over a pedestrian - even then he admiting guilty right before the trial (magistrate)