Lay Personnel: Jury Role In Criminal Courts (Copy)

1.3 Legal Personnel

1.3.3 Lay Personnel

Role of Juries in Criminal Courts

Introduction

• The jury system is one of the oldest and most symbolic features of English criminal justice, dating back to Magna Carta (1215).
• It reflects the principle that ordinary citizens should participate in the administration of justice, ensuring trials are fair and public confidence is maintained.
• In modern England and Wales, juries are used primarily in the Crown Court for serious criminal offences.
• Their role embodies democratic participation, fairness, and impartiality, making them a cornerstone of the legal system.

When Juries Are Used

• Juries are only used in the Crown Court.
• Cases include:
  • Indictable-only offences (e.g., murder, rape, robbery, terrorism).
  • Either-way offences where defendant elects trial by jury, or magistrates decide Crown Court trial is necessary.
• No jury trials in Magistrates’ Court (summary offences are tried by magistrates).
• Juries are not generally used in civil cases today (except rare cases of defamation, false imprisonment, or malicious prosecution under s.69 Senior Courts Act 1981).

Composition of the Jury

• Jury consists of 12 lay members of the public.
• Selected randomly from the electoral register under the Juries Act 1974.
• Jurors must be:
  • Aged 18–75.
  • Resident in UK for at least 5 years since age 13.
  • Not disqualified (e.g., due to serious criminal conviction, mental incapacity).
• Random selection reflects the principle that juries represent a “cross-section of society.”

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia, World Record Holder With 154 Total A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change AS Level Law Full Scale Course

Role of Juries in Criminal Trials

1. Fact-Finding Role
   • Jury decides questions of fact, not law.
   • Judge directs them on law and procedure; jury determines guilt or innocence based on evidence.
   • Example: In a murder trial, judge explains elements of the offence, but jury decides if the accused actually committed the act with intent.
2. Listening to Evidence
   • Jurors listen to witnesses, cross-examination, and expert testimony.
   • Expected to remain impartial and not conduct their own investigations (illegal under Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015).
3. Assessment of Credibility
   • Jury decides which witnesses to believe, weighing consistency and reliability.
4. Deliberations
   • Jury retires in private to deliberate.
   • Discussions are secret — cannot be disclosed even after the trial (s.8 Contempt of Court Act 1981).
   • Secrecy protects free discussion and independence.
5. Verdict
   • Jury returns a guilty or not guilty verdict.
   • Originally required unanimity (12–0), but now acceptable with majority of 10–2 (or 11–1) under the Criminal Justice Act 1967.
   • Jury does not give reasons — verdict is final and unreasoned.
6. Special Verdicts
   • “Not guilty by reason of insanity” (under Criminal Procedure (Insanity) Act 1964).
   • “Unfit to plead” decisions in special circumstances.

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia, World Record Holder With 154 Total A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change AS Level Law Full Scale Course

Relationship Between Judge and Jury

• Judge’s Role:
  • Oversees trial procedure, ensures fairness.
  • Summarises evidence impartially for jury.
  • Directs jury on law.
  • Decides sentence if guilty verdict returned.
• Jury’s Role:
  • Solely to determine facts and return a verdict.
  • Independent — judge cannot pressure jury’s decision.
• Case Example:
  • R v Wang (2005): House of Lords held judge cannot direct jury to convict; decision is jury’s alone.

Jury Independence

• Bushell’s Case (1670): Established jury independence. Jurors cannot be punished for returning verdicts contrary to judge’s wishes.
• R v McKenna (1960): Judge threatened jury with imprisonment if they did not reach a verdict quickly; conviction quashed — coercion undermines independence.

Strengths of Jury Role

1. Democratic Participation
   • Involves ordinary citizens in justice → “trial by peers.”
2. Public Confidence
   • Seen as fairer and less elitist than professional judges deciding alone.
3. Protection Against State Power
   • Juries can acquit despite strong prosecution (jury equity).
   • Example: R v Ponting (1985) – civil servant acquitted despite breach of Official Secrets Act because jury sympathised with his whistleblowing motives.
4. Secrecy of Deliberations
   • Protects jurors from outside influence and enables frank discussion.

Weaknesses of Jury Role

1. Lack of Reasons
   • Juries do not give reasons for verdicts, leading to lack of transparency.
2. Risk of Bias or Prejudice
   • Jurors may be influenced by stereotypes, media coverage, or personal prejudice.
3. Competence Concerns
   • Jurors may struggle to understand complex cases (e.g., fraud trials, technical evidence).
4. Secrecy Drawbacks
   • Protects independence but prevents scrutiny of improper decision-making.
5. Cost and Delay
   • Jury trials more expensive and time-consuming than magistrates’ trials.

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia, World Record Holder With 154 Total A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change AS Level Law Full Scale Course

Case Law Demonstrating Jury Role

• Bushell’s Case (1670): Jurors’ right to independent verdicts.
• R v Wang (2005): Judge cannot order jury to convict.
• R v Ponting (1985): Jury equity — acquittal despite law breach.
• R v Kronlid (1996): Jury acquitted defendants who admitted damaging fighter jets; jury followed conscience rather than strict law.

Evaluation

Strengths

• Protects liberty by placing justice in the hands of ordinary people.
• Provides community participation and legitimacy.
• Acts as safeguard against political oppression.
• Can show mercy through jury equity.

Weaknesses

• Secrecy prevents accountability.
• Bias and media influence can undermine fairness.
• Lack of understanding of complex evidence risks unjust verdicts.
• Inconsistent application of justice (jury equity cuts both ways).

Conclusion

• The role of juries in criminal courts is to determine guilt or innocence in serious cases, ensuring justice is not just administered by legal professionals but by society itself.
• Their independence, secrecy of deliberations, and ability to act according to conscience make them a unique and powerful institution.
• While criticisms exist regarding competence, bias, and cost, the jury remains a symbol of democracy and fairness at the heart of English criminal law.

Written and Compiled By Sir Hunain Zia, World Record Holder With 154 Total A Grades, 7 Distinctions and 11 World Records For Educate A Change AS Level Law Full Scale Course