Are you fit to serve on a jury?

[Reading Seagull]

At least we're not in the States where the first part of the trial is the two barristers picking who they want and don't want on the jury to give their client the best chance of winning the case (I believe its usually based on sex / race or defendant and jury)

Not exactly sure how it works exactly but I think they each get a certain number of 'strikes' where they can completely remove jurors without giving reasons. Seems crazy !!!

Maybe someone far more informed than me can correct me or explain

 

[Cian]

Never been called, only have a district court (judge only), family law court (judge only) and a limited circuit court (jury) in my electoral area so the chances are very, very slim too.

My dad was on the jury for a rape case in the '70s, the bloke admitted it about halfway through the trial, but only after most of the evidence had been given. Jury were given a lifetime dismissal as a result.

 

[bhaexpress]

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.

Rather sums up my view.

 

[Gwylan]

At least we're not in the States where the first part of the trial is the two barristers picking who they want and don't want on the jury to give their client the best chance of winning the case (I believe its usually based on sex / race or defendant and jury)

When I did jury service, I had three trials. For each one, the jury was 11 white and 1 black: three of the four defendants were black.

The only white defendant was found guilty and two of the three black defendants were found not guilty - which does suggest the race composition of a jury is not really relevant (at least not in the UK).

However, I know that defence barristers in rape cases will do everything in their power to get women on the jury as women jurors are far more likely to acquit a rapist than male ones are. You'd think it would be the other way round but it's not.

 

[snowdrop]

Was called for jury service 13 years ago whilst in the RAF, serving as a Policeman. Told them and they wouldn't let me play, maybe because I knew the guilty one is the one in the box on their own

 

[Reading Seagull]

(at least not in the UK).

Very good point imagine its different across the pond - especially deep south!

Interesting fact about women jurors and rape cases - would have put money on it being the other way round !

 

[Barrel of Fun]

My mother was removed from court as she knew the judge.

NOt been called up, but I suspect I would not be eligible unless the court has a loop system.

 

[Biscuit]

What's the likelihood of being given the nod then?

 

[cjd]

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?

The whole point of the jury system, is that 12 people are asked to determine whether the person in the dock, is guilty or not guilty, on the evidence submitted.

It is up to the Judge to decide the sentence, if the person is found guilty.

Did jury service a few years ago.........( a woman charged with burglary). Frankly, it was obvious from the evidence submitted she was guilty, but two women jurors voted initially that she was 'not guilty'. When pressed by the other exasperated jurors to give their reasons, the answer was..." because we're worried what will happen to her three young children, if she is sent to prison"....!

Hours later, after managing to convince them that the judge would take her situation with the children into consideration when sentencing her, and we were sure he wouldn't be a nasty man and send her to prison, the verdict became guilty...12-0.

She was sent to prison....the two women jurors cried.......pathetic.

 

[bhaexpress]

However, I know that defence barristers in rape cases will do everything in their power to get women on the jury as women jurors are far more likely to acquit a rapist than male ones are. You'd think it would be the other way round but it's not.

Tell you an odd story about that, when I had my short spell working for her majesty the bloke in the peter next to me seemed like a nice bloke, very religious but despite that a nice chap. Anyway he was actually having his trial at the time and had to go off to court every morning. However he always went off dragging a sack load of paperwork which was rather odd. Anyway I was moved and pretty much forgot about him.

A few months later I was 2working and happened to look over somebody's shoulder at their Evening Standard, the bloke above was in there, he'd been given 24 years ! he'd been done for rape, false imprisonment and having sex with a minor. He had sacked two sets of lawyers and in the end conducted his own defence. However what he did was to grill each of the female witnesses against him and literally tortured them. It was because of him and a couple of others like him that the law was changed to prevent this happening.

I still can't figure just why such a devout, Bible reading God lover could be such a complete and evil bastard.

 

[Blackadder]

(at least not in the UK).

Very good point imagine its different across the pond - especially deep south!

Interesting fact about women jurors and rape cases - would have put money on it being the other way round !

So would I. I was on a rape case but was one of the jurors not picked in the lottery process. I was one of 2 men left.

The defendant "Claimed" that he thought that he'd seen a young female juror in the past so she was asked to step down. I still wasn't selected the other guy was.

As I left the court with the young juror, she said "I've never seen that guy in my life!". We assumed that the defendant's lawyer asked the defendant to replace a female with a bloke to help his case.

 

[NMH]

When I did jury service, I had three trials. For each one, the jury was 11 white and 1 black: three of the four defendants were black.

The only white defendant was found guilty and two of the three black defendants were found not guilty - which does suggest the race composition of a jury is not really relevant (at least not in the UK).

However, I know that defence barristers in rape cases will do everything in their power to get women on the jury as women jurors are far more likely to acquit a rapist than male ones are. You'd think it would be the other way round but it's not.

That makes sense though - if a woman claims she was raped and he says she was gagging for a shag, the women are more likely to know how that feels, and the denial afterwards, and agree with the bloke

 

[hans kraay fan club]

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.

Sounds familiar...

 

[Durlston]

Hmmmm. Jury service eh? *strokes stubble on chin with distant stare*

Nah. Can't see myself being called up for that.

 

[Spanish Seagulls]

As Im abroad unlikely ot ever be asked now but not sure I would want to be on a jury...I know that everything I will hear will be tainted so unlikely to get the whole story...lawyers are about as reliable as drug sales executives..... they have too much vested interest.

I like that, Drug Sales Executives, has a nice ring about it. Better than "Drug Dealer"