Juries. What's Your Verdict ?

In

indeed, seeing as juries are supposed to be a true reflection of society - shouldn’t at least one member of a jury be an illegal immigrant?

Quite. I'd say juries only really work well in homogenous societies. We're too tribal to be really impartial IMO.
 

Dalef65

Old-Salt
Chap who used to work with us said his get out clause was “I am here under duress, the entire system is corrupt and immoral, I don’t believe that any defendant ever gets a truly fair trial, so I will vote for not guilty no matter what.”

Excused at least 3 times using that.

Technically he could be hit with a contempt of court charge for saying that.

Wasn't there a youngish girl on a jury in a high profile fraud case about 15 years ago who said something along these lines.
ISTR She waited till near the end of the trial then declared that she hadn't really been listening and didn't really understand what was going on.
If I remember rightly she got given a night in the cells for contempt of court and a stern talking to from the judge.
 
I’ve never done jury duty, but I don’t like these tales. The defendant’s liberty is at stake. I couldn’t in all consciousness put my name to a finding someone guilty when I was not completely sure of the guilt. Even if it was a Pikey with 30 years’ worth of previous, I’d be there to consider this one crime. if the prosecution proved that he did it, no compunction, guilty, bang ‘im up. But if there’s doubt, then I couldn’t vote for guilty.

In some cases, some jurors’ prejudices against the defendant, witnesses or victim seem to prevail. If I was a dissenter, and they’d gone for guilty when there was still doubt, I’d want to have it known that I dissented. I don’t think there’s a mechanism for that though. The verdict might be 11-1, but they don’t say “juror 6 dissented and wishes to be dissociated from this verdict”.

Don’t think I’d enjoy being a juror. I’d do it out of a sense of duty, but I imagine it would play on my mind for some time afterward, whichever way the result went.
 
Don’t think I’d enjoy being a juror. I’d do it out of a sense of duty, but I imagine it would play on my mind for some time afterward, whichever way the result went.

Which is why the jury system works. Enough particpants take it seriously enought for it to be largely succesful
 
I always quite liked the Ancient Greek way of doing things, the jury consisted of a few hundred citizens and no lawyers. It was up to the victim to try and convince the jury of the accused person's guilt and the accused to prove their innocence.

The best part was they could also decide their fate, but they couldn't be too harsh either because the jury voted on that too.

No case lasted more than a few days and with a larger jury it was more likely that there might be a few smart people to convince the others of the right course for justice.

Nowadays cases last for years and people die before getting justice, the guilty often have more rights than the victims and the mega rich can buy their way out. In some ways the Greek system was superior, imho.
And then they burned them for being witches?
 
I’ve never done jury duty, but I don’t like these tales. The defendant’s liberty is at stake. I couldn’t in all consciousness put my name to a finding someone guilty when I was not completely sure of the guilt. Even if it was a Pikey with 30 years’ worth of previous, I’d be there to consider this one crime. if the prosecution proved that he did it, no compunction, guilty, bang ‘im up. But if there’s doubt, then I couldn’t vote for guilty.

In some cases, some jurors’ prejudices against the defendant, witnesses or victim seem to prevail. If I was a dissenter, and they’d gone for guilty when there was still doubt, I’d want to have it known that I dissented. I don’t think there’s a mechanism for that though. The verdict might be 11-1, but they don’t say “juror 6 dissented and wishes to be dissociated from this verdict”.

100% this.
 
The issue is, to get DV you have to be stable and reliable. That would exclude 80-90% of normal society.

It would also cause mass gnashing of teeth when it turns out that DV would exclude almost all 'Woke' types, leaving a largely middle class jury pool.
I've a few nutters who were DV'ed...a lot fitted into the 'Woke' type category as well.
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
Lost me old boy.
The judge saw what you wrote “hang the bastard” and realised he left his black cap at home.
He didn’t want to disappoint.
 

Gout Man

LE
Book Reviewer
I’ve never done jury duty, but I don’t like these tales. The defendant’s liberty is at stake. I couldn’t in all consciousness put my name to a finding someone guilty when I was not completely sure of the guilt. Even if it was a Pikey with 30 years’ worth of previous, I’d be there to consider this one crime. if the prosecution proved that he did it, no compunction, guilty, bang ‘im up. But if there’s doubt, then I couldn’t vote for guilty.

In some cases, some jurors’ prejudices against the defendant, witnesses or victim seem to prevail. If I was a dissenter, and they’d gone for guilty when there was still doubt, I’d want to have it known that I dissented. I don’t think there’s a mechanism for that though. The verdict might be 11-1, but they don’t say “juror 6 dissented and wishes to be dissociated from this verdict”.

Don’t think I’d enjoy being a juror. I’d do it out of a sense of duty, but I imagine it would play on my mind for some time afterward, whichever way the result went.
The general population in Texas and other death penalty states don’t appear to get hung up about capital murder trials, I suppose it’s what you are brought up with.
 
I’ve never done jury duty, but I don’t like these tales. The defendant’s liberty is at stake. I couldn’t in all consciousness put my name to a finding someone guilty when I was not completely sure of the guilt. Even if it was a Pikey with 30 years’ worth of previous, I’d be there to consider this one crime. if the prosecution proved that he did it, no compunction, guilty, bang ‘im up. But if there’s doubt, then I couldn’t vote for guilty.

In some cases, some jurors’ prejudices against the defendant, witnesses or victim seem to prevail. If I was a dissenter, and they’d gone for guilty when there was still doubt, I’d want to have it known that I dissented. I don’t think there’s a mechanism for that though. The verdict might be 11-1, but they don’t say “juror 6 dissented and wishes to be dissociated from this verdict”.

Don’t think I’d enjoy being a juror. I’d do it out of a sense of duty, but I imagine it would play on my mind for some time afterward, whichever way the result went.
Well that is how the system is supposed to work
 
I've done jury service once, historic sex abuse case brought by two sisters against an uncle, I listened hard to everything that was said by all the witnesses and came to a conclusion that the older sister was telling the truth, but the younger sister was lying that it happened to her just to back up her older sister, when the jury retired they made me spokesperson as it was soon clear none of the other jurors had been listening to the case, one, an old fella in his 70's who just wanted all three charges as "not guilty", was guilty himself of snoring during the case being read. Jurors need to be shown where they haven't listened and heard valuable information on which they could make an honest judgement, all the female jurors wanted a guilty on all charges, and the males wanted all charges not guilty. In the end they all had to admit they hadn't been able to concentrate on the case for the three days and took my advice, we went with guilty on count three only.
It's down to the prosecution to make the jury aware and the judge to give direction.
 

Rab_C

LE
I've done jury service once, historic sex abuse case brought by two sisters against an uncle, I listened hard to everything that was said by all the witnesses and came to a conclusion that the older sister was telling the truth, but the younger sister was lying that it happened to her just to back up her older sister, when the jury retired they made me spokesperson as it was soon clear none of the other jurors had been listening to the case, one, an old fella in his 70's who just wanted all three charges as "not guilty", was guilty himself of snoring during the case being read. Jurors need to be shown where they haven't listened and heard valuable information on which they could make an honest judgement, all the female jurors wanted a guilty on all charges, and the males wanted all charges not guilty. In the end they all had to admit they hadn't been able to concentrate on the case for the three days and took my advice, we went with guilty on count three only.
I wasn’t there however playing devils advocate, you convinced the jury to go with your conclusion.......
Was it a genuine verdict of 12 or one pushy jurors view?
I am not saying you were that pushy juror but it does show that the system is open to coercion.
 
Not Proven shows I'm talking Scottish jury system and in Scottish folklore it's a cop out that satisfies no one. Every few years politicians say they're going to look in to it but nothing comes of it. Also in Scotland we have a 15 person jury system
...Fortunately, Scotland also has a requirement for corroboration of evidence. Likewise, the politicians say they're going to get rid of it (normally in the belief that it makes rape too hard to prosecute), but nothing comes of it. "Not Proven" has its uses - consider the implication of "we reckon they're guilty, but couldn't convict because the Fiscal wasn't convincing enough" when you hear Alex Salmond declaring that he's completely vindicated, and is definitely not a creepy groping twat with a penchant for sexual assault.

I got pinged for jury service, as juror number 16, but the nutjob* who was number 15 was excused; the Judge declared that knew her as a parent at his kid's school (thus presumably knew what a fruitcake she was) and heaved her from the jury. So, that part worked.

It was a rape case. Three days in a High Court trial, held at the Sheriff Court (i.e. walking past the "frequent flyers" every morning), including a recording that was a masterclass in interrogation techniques delivered by a CID D/Sgt, and a prosecutor who was a fumbling oaf. It was becoming obvious that both victim and accused seemed convinced that their version of events was correct, when we were thanked for our service and told to go away; I don't know what happened to the case. The other jury members seemed to be taking it seriously, and paying attention.

* She started chatting away randomly after sitting next to me. "Crystal healing, horoscope, tarot, I can read auras" type, is the politest way to put it.
 
The general population in Texas and other death penalty states don’t appear to get hung up about capital murder trials, I suppose it’s what you are brought up with.
I was under the impression - maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong ?- that in capital murder trials in certain American states the potential jury members are asked their opinions of the death penalty before they're sworn in . If you're opposed to the death penalty then you're not picked in case your views affect your verdict . It was also a long standing argument against the re-introduction of capital punishment in Britain ie juries would be reluctant to find someone guilty if they knew the accused was going to be hanged
 

sirbhp

LE
Book Reviewer
I knew a chap (now dead) who when he was on trial for gbh met one of the jurors at lunch break and pulled her . I always thought that they should be kept separate to avoid corrupting but he ho .

I also believe that very technical trials such as financial or environmental ones should be held with just ordinary juries so that both sides have to break down the arguments to a basic level so that even the chap on the clapham omnibus can understand whats going on .
 
When i got pinged, due to a cock up,i got a phone call from a tearful jury officer, "why are you not here?' you said no attandance today last night,"no i did not' ok how many of us are missing "err all of you'
so i said i can be there in 20 mins,she worked out she would have enough of us to carry on the trail.
so i get there and she has aged about 15 years in a hour expecting the judge to go batshit, when i mention i had just seen the defentant in the street getting on a bus marked as getting the hell out of here.
10 minutes later its confirmed he had done a runner, i could have bend her over the jury room table she was so happy but settled for a lifetime get out of jury service free card
 
Top