Unit 3 2.5 miss johannes
Discuss the use of lay people in criminal cases
Laypeople are ordinary members of the public, who do not have specialised or professional
knowledge of the law/ legal procedure. They serve two roles in the english legal system:
● Members of the jury
● Magistrates
The jury's role
In most crown court trials, the verdict is normally decided by a jury of 12 lay people. The jury
hears the evidence and arguments put forward by the prosecution & defence. If they wish, they
can take notes and, via the judge, ask questions. The judge will advise them on relevant law.
They then retire from the courtroom to decide whether or not they find the defendant guilty, not
guilty or guilty of a less serious crime. E.g manslaughter rather than murder. To bring in a guilty
verdict, they must be convinced ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
The jury's decision is taken in secret and the criminal justice & courts act 2015 makes it an
offence for anyone to question jurors about their verdict or how they reached it. Jurors are only
allowed to disclose their deliberations in situations such as to report misconduct by other jurors.
Selection jurors are selected randomly by a computer from the names on the electoral register.
Those selected will receive a summons to attend court. Jury service is normally for two weeks,
though it will be longer if a trial goes on beyond its trial period.
eligibility to be eligible to serve as a juror, the juries act 1974 and criminal justice act 2003
state that you must:
● Be aged 18-75
● Be a citizen of the uk, the irish republic or a british commonwealth country
● Have resided in the uk, the channel islands of the isle of man for 5 years.
Disqualification certain people are disqualified from jury service, including those on bail and
those who have ever received a prison sentence of 5 years or more. Anyone who has received
a shorter sentence is disqualified for 10 years.
Exemptions those selected for jury service are legally required to attend court. However, it is
possible to be excused on medical and other grounds e.g a holiday you have already paid for.
Strengths of the jury system
Jury equity
Unlike judges, jurors are not bound by what a law says or by precedents (verdicts reached
previously in similar cases). As ordinary members of the public, they are free to decide a case
based on what they feel is fair or morally right, regardless of the law or how the judge might
direct them to apply it to the case.
The trial of clive ponting
A good example of jury equity is the acquittal of the senior civil servant clive ponting. During the
Falklands war with Argentina in 1982, the british navy sank the argentinian cruiser, the general
belgrano, with the loss of 323 lives. Britain had declared an exclusion zone around the falklands
, islands and said that any argentinian ship inside it would be attacked. The belgrano had been
outside the exclusion zone when it was sunk and was only attacked after a top-level
government decision to change the british navy's rules of engagement.
3 years later ponting leaked secret government documents
about the sinking to an MP and was subsequently charged
with breaching the official secrets act 1911. Ponting did not
deny his action ( he had admitted it even before he was
arrested) but argued in his defence that he had acted in the
public interest by revealing the facts.
The judge ruled that Ponting had no defence and directed the
jury to convict him as he had clearly contravened the act by
leaking official secrets. The jury nevertheless acquitted him.
Kay Gilderdale
In a case in 2010, kay gilderdale was charged with attempting
to murder her 31 year old daughter lynn, who had been
seriously ill for 17 years. Evidence showed kay was a devoted
and caring mother. Lynn had sought to commit suicide by
injecting herself with morphine. When this apparently failed to
work, her mother Lynn administered other drugs and she died
some hours later. Kay pleaded guilty to asssiting lynns suicide,
but the CPS chose to prosecute her instead for attempted
murder. However the jury acquitted her.
Justice is seen to be done
The juries make the legal system more open and justice can be seen to be done because it is
ordinary members of the public who decide the outcome. Also, because the judge has to explain
points of law to the jury in pen court, both the defendant and the public at large are able to
understand the case more clearly.
Impartiality & a fairer trial
Many people believe that jury trials are fairer than being tired by a judge or magistrates. You
are being tried by your peers (equals) rather than by a single individual judge or their
magistrates who may be unable to relate to your circumstances or may have particular
prejudices. Being tried by a randomly selected cross-section of society makes it more likely that
individuals prejudices will be cancelled out and an impartial jury created.
Also because a jury usually only sits for 2 weeks and only hears a few cases, it does not
become case hardened. By contrast,judges and magistrates have been accused of being
prosecution-minded.
Secrecy
Discuss the use of lay people in criminal cases
Laypeople are ordinary members of the public, who do not have specialised or professional
knowledge of the law/ legal procedure. They serve two roles in the english legal system:
● Members of the jury
● Magistrates
The jury's role
In most crown court trials, the verdict is normally decided by a jury of 12 lay people. The jury
hears the evidence and arguments put forward by the prosecution & defence. If they wish, they
can take notes and, via the judge, ask questions. The judge will advise them on relevant law.
They then retire from the courtroom to decide whether or not they find the defendant guilty, not
guilty or guilty of a less serious crime. E.g manslaughter rather than murder. To bring in a guilty
verdict, they must be convinced ‘beyond reasonable doubt’.
The jury's decision is taken in secret and the criminal justice & courts act 2015 makes it an
offence for anyone to question jurors about their verdict or how they reached it. Jurors are only
allowed to disclose their deliberations in situations such as to report misconduct by other jurors.
Selection jurors are selected randomly by a computer from the names on the electoral register.
Those selected will receive a summons to attend court. Jury service is normally for two weeks,
though it will be longer if a trial goes on beyond its trial period.
eligibility to be eligible to serve as a juror, the juries act 1974 and criminal justice act 2003
state that you must:
● Be aged 18-75
● Be a citizen of the uk, the irish republic or a british commonwealth country
● Have resided in the uk, the channel islands of the isle of man for 5 years.
Disqualification certain people are disqualified from jury service, including those on bail and
those who have ever received a prison sentence of 5 years or more. Anyone who has received
a shorter sentence is disqualified for 10 years.
Exemptions those selected for jury service are legally required to attend court. However, it is
possible to be excused on medical and other grounds e.g a holiday you have already paid for.
Strengths of the jury system
Jury equity
Unlike judges, jurors are not bound by what a law says or by precedents (verdicts reached
previously in similar cases). As ordinary members of the public, they are free to decide a case
based on what they feel is fair or morally right, regardless of the law or how the judge might
direct them to apply it to the case.
The trial of clive ponting
A good example of jury equity is the acquittal of the senior civil servant clive ponting. During the
Falklands war with Argentina in 1982, the british navy sank the argentinian cruiser, the general
belgrano, with the loss of 323 lives. Britain had declared an exclusion zone around the falklands
, islands and said that any argentinian ship inside it would be attacked. The belgrano had been
outside the exclusion zone when it was sunk and was only attacked after a top-level
government decision to change the british navy's rules of engagement.
3 years later ponting leaked secret government documents
about the sinking to an MP and was subsequently charged
with breaching the official secrets act 1911. Ponting did not
deny his action ( he had admitted it even before he was
arrested) but argued in his defence that he had acted in the
public interest by revealing the facts.
The judge ruled that Ponting had no defence and directed the
jury to convict him as he had clearly contravened the act by
leaking official secrets. The jury nevertheless acquitted him.
Kay Gilderdale
In a case in 2010, kay gilderdale was charged with attempting
to murder her 31 year old daughter lynn, who had been
seriously ill for 17 years. Evidence showed kay was a devoted
and caring mother. Lynn had sought to commit suicide by
injecting herself with morphine. When this apparently failed to
work, her mother Lynn administered other drugs and she died
some hours later. Kay pleaded guilty to asssiting lynns suicide,
but the CPS chose to prosecute her instead for attempted
murder. However the jury acquitted her.
Justice is seen to be done
The juries make the legal system more open and justice can be seen to be done because it is
ordinary members of the public who decide the outcome. Also, because the judge has to explain
points of law to the jury in pen court, both the defendant and the public at large are able to
understand the case more clearly.
Impartiality & a fairer trial
Many people believe that jury trials are fairer than being tired by a judge or magistrates. You
are being tried by your peers (equals) rather than by a single individual judge or their
magistrates who may be unable to relate to your circumstances or may have particular
prejudices. Being tried by a randomly selected cross-section of society makes it more likely that
individuals prejudices will be cancelled out and an impartial jury created.
Also because a jury usually only sits for 2 weeks and only hears a few cases, it does not
become case hardened. By contrast,judges and magistrates have been accused of being
prosecution-minded.
Secrecy
