Are you fit to serve on a jury?

[mcshane in the 79th]

I did Jury service about 8 years ago. The guy who was up in our case was clearly up to something dodgy to do with buying cars abroad and I would guess some kind of tax evasion or money laundering. His story didn't add up but the prosecution couldn't produce enough evidence to say without doubt that he was guilty so we had to returna Not Guilty verdict. The good thing about the time I spentthere was that my work had said they don't want me on call for the 2 weeks so allowed me the 2 weeks off to be paid by the courts. Spent 6 hours in the court over 2 half days, never got called to court again and spent 2 weeks off work being paid my normal wage but it was tax free. Not a bad experience!

Sounds similar to my experience, except when I did get called up it was for case that was predicted to last 6 weeks, but actually ended up as 10 weeks. Got my normal wage plus extra for petrol, parking and lunch money. It was brilliant.

 

[KZNSeagull]

Frankly I am dubious of the whole judicial system. Far too many judges with their own agenda, a bit of consistency wouldn't be a bad thing. The fact that the barristers are more concerned with winning than just also concerns me. I used to be on a pub quiz team which was made up mainly of barristers and solicitors. One of them was a CPS barrister and he regularly came up against other members of the team which to me seems to be a bit of a conflict of interest.

I also know from personal experience that the Police are about as honest as they can get away with, I am highly dubious of what a member of the constabulary will say.

Don't think I'll get asked anyway.

It is still an awful lot better than many judicial systems though. Whilst there will be exceptions, it is untarnished by political interference, the scourge of many other countries.

You could also have a constabulary that operates an unofficial shoot to kill policy which, again with a few exceptions, has not happened there yet either.

 

[Nibble]

While I agree with bhaexpress to a degree I guess it all comes down to who is picked for the jury. Which could be a problem, I don't know what criteria they use to select jury members but it can't be a great system if they pick the likes of me!

 

[KZNSeagull]

While I agree with bhaexpress to a degree I guess it all comes down to who is picked for the jury. Which could be a problem, I don't know what criteria they use to select jury members but it can't be a great system if they pick the likes of me!

I believe they choose a number from the electoral roll and pick everyone with that number in each electoral district who isn't otherwise disqualified. That certainly was the system when I was chosen anyway (cos I asked).

 

[bhaexpress]

It is still an awful lot better than many judicial systems though. Whilst there will be exceptions, it is untarnished by political interference, the scourge of many other countries.

You could also have a constabulary that operates an unofficial shoot to kill policy which, again with a few exceptions, has not happened there yet either.

I appreciate there are many worse but there are more than a few factors that put me off. Seeing a barrister trying to humiliate a witness or cut them off short to distort what the say would make me think that the person in the dock was guilty whether they were or weren't. I have to give evidence in an assault case where the barrister tried to infer that I was a racist because the defendant was black. He did get rather irritated because I kept stopping and starting and also asking him to repeat his questions which rather broke up his his train of thought. His client was found guilty.

However I'd been warned that this barrister would try and make me look bad as it was typical of how he dealt with prosecution witnesses so rather than getting flustered I'd pretty much rehearsed what I was going to say anyway.

 

[Simster]

I appreciate there are many worse but there are more than a few factors that put me off. Seeing a barrister trying to humiliate a witness or cut them off short to distort what the say would make me think that the person in the dock was guilty whether they were or weren't. I have to give evidence in an assault case where the barrister tried to infer that I was a racist because the defendant was black. He did get rather irritated because I kept stopping and starting and also asking him to repeat his questions which rather broke up his his train of thought. His client was found guilty.

However I'd been warned that this barrister would try and make me look bad as it was typical of how he dealt with prosecution witnesses so rather than getting flustered I'd pretty much rehearsed what I was going to say anyway.

But it's a barrister's job to try and discredit witnesses that give evidence contrary to his client's interests isn't it? I mean, in this instance, if you were racist, you'd rather hope the jury got to find that out.

The whole discrediting witnesses issue is the problem with victims as witnesses in cases like rape and violent assault, I guess.

 

[The Large One]

I appreciate there are many worse but there are more than a few factors that put me off. Seeing a barrister trying to humiliate a witness or cut them off short to distort what the say would make me think that the person in the dock was guilty whether they were or weren't. I have to give evidence in an assault case where the barrister tried to infer that I was a racist because the defendant was black. He did get rather irritated because I kept stopping and starting and also asking him to repeat his questions which rather broke up his his train of thought. His client was found guilty.

However I'd been warned that this barrister would try and make me look bad as it was typical of how he dealt with prosecution witnesses so rather than getting flustered I'd pretty much rehearsed what I was going to say anyway.

Not dis-similar to what happened to me, except I was a defence witness, and the defendant was found not guilty.

In this instance, when cross-examined by the prosecution, he tried to pick the tiniest holes in what I was saying, trip me up and twist my words into making out they meant something else. The only hole (and it could have been a big one) was that I naively went to lunch with the defendant just before I gave evidence. Of course, they couldn't prove any wrong-doing in the conversations we had, but it made it look bad.

I later heard that the jury were going to acquit even before the defence witnesses were called, so weak was the prosecution case.

 

[KZNSeagull]

I appreciate there are many worse but there are more than a few factors that put me off. Seeing a barrister trying to humiliate a witness or cut them off short to distort what the say would make me think that the person in the dock was guilty whether they were or weren't. I have to give evidence in an assault case where the barrister tried to infer that I was a racist because the defendant was black. He did get rather irritated because I kept stopping and starting and also asking him to repeat his questions which rather broke up his his train of thought. His client was found guilty.

However I'd been warned that this barrister would try and make me look bad as it was typical of how he dealt with prosecution witnesses so rather than getting flustered I'd pretty much rehearsed what I was going to say anyway.

I sympathise with you and dont disagree, but as Simster says, that is the job of the defence barrister. Winning a case after the defence has tried to discredit every prosecution witness only strengthens the prosecution imo and leaves less room for appeals. So, whilst I appreciate that what you went through was unpleasantl, because your evidence stood up and you did not give in, you can proudly say that you were part of a sound prosecution. I have never given evidence and would not like to, frankly, as I know that I would get flustered and may end up saying something that I did not mean, so I admire the fact that you did not waver.

What I do find disagreeable is when barristers do this because they know that their client is guilty. I could never get anyone off a charge that I knew they were guilty of. But again, that is part of their job.

 

[Blackadder]

What I do find disagreeable is when barristers do this because they know that their client is guilty. I could never get anyone off a charge that I knew they were guilty of. But again, that is part of their job.

That's what I could never get my head around. My client is guilty of murder but I will get him off for my 30 pieces of silver!

I did 2 weeks Jury service. I was looking forward to doing my civic duty. All my cases collapsed or I wasn't picked. It was a boring time.

 

[bhaexpress]

But it's a barrister's job to try and discredit witnesses that give evidence contrary to his client's interests isn't it? I mean, in this instance, if you were racist, you'd rather hope the jury got to find that out.

The whole discrediting witnesses issue is the problem with victims as witnesses in cases like rape and violent assault, I guess.

Of course it is his job but most people should be able to see past the façade however not all jury members are that smart. A lot of what goes on is pure theatre but the difference being is that a court is supposed to be fact not fiction. I have little doubt that had I not known about this barrister beforehand (or let's face it, had he been a better barrister) I might very well have been caught out.

It always seems to be a bit of a game but granted it's a better system than most. I think that we should have professional jurors as they would be experienced enough to see these through the antics of the barristers and the foibles of the judge.

 

[mcshane in the 79th]

I think that we should have professional jurors as they would be experienced enough to see these through the antics of the barristers and the foibles of the judge.

I would LOVE that job

 

[Return of the Rev]

Not dis-similar to what happened to me, except I was a defence witness, and the defendant was found not guilty.

In this instance, when cross-examined by the prosecution, he tried to pick the tiniest holes in what I was saying, trip me up and twist my words into making out they meant something else. The only hole (and it could have been a big one) was that I naively went to lunch with the defendant just before I gave evidence. Of course, they couldn't prove any wrong-doing in the conversations we had, but it made it look bad.

I later heard that the jury were going to acquit even before the defence witnesses were called, so weak was the prosecution case.

those bosnian war crime trials did get a bit tricky

 

[ILIKECANDLES]

I have waited too many years to serve on a jury, but have finally decided I am too intolerant to make sound judgments.

For instance, anyone wearing a hoody up over their head would immediately be sent down for at least 2 years.

Any other intolerant souls on here?

done it. they all went dahhhn

 

[PHCgull]

I would be happy to do jury service, as long as the defendant(s) were from the Thornton heath, fareham or Medway town areas...

 

[El Presidente]

I did jury service about five years ago and was unamimoulsy elected foreman of the jurors by my fellow jurors because "we like the way you read out the oath", which seems a ludicrous way to make a decision, but was indicative of the general cluelessness of most of the jurors.

 

[NMH]

GUILTY

GUILTY

GUILTY

He looks like a nice old man - INNOCENT

Point well made!!

 

[NMH]

We have to realize that all the people selected for a jury are just as fallible as any of us might be in making a judgment. It's very easy for an accused to seem guilty, their own words can appear to trip them up - which is why they need legal representation.

I definitely wouldn't want to do it

 

[Return of the Rev]

Point well made!!

are they all guilty?

 

[BLOCK F]

Only Guardian readers should be allowed to serve on a jury.

Couldn't get 12 people though,could they!

 

[BLOCK F]

Have never been called to do Jury service and never wanted to whilst I was working;now retired wouldn't mind at all!.......for a relatively short case that is!