AC 2.5 (20)
Juries
● Lay people (ordinary people- no legal knowledge)
● Decide verdict of criminal case- guilty/not guilty (crown Court)
● Jury trial only take place in around 1% cases
● Eligibility for jury selection+qualification contained in Jury Act 1974 + Criminal Justice
Act 2003
● Randomly selected from electoral register
● 18-75
● residency requirements 5+years in UK
● No recent criminal convictions
Role:
● Listen to E- decide guilt/innocence of D
● Advised on law by judge- can take notes/ask Q’s via Judge
● must not speak about case to anyone outside of jury
● Must deliberate in jury room
● Discussions in jury room must remain secret
● Decision they make cannot be questioned
● Sit for 2 weeks (unless been agreed it’ll take longer)
● Jury duty compulsory- possibility of it being deferred for good reason e.g. holidays,
medical appointment etc
● Lawyers, Judges+ other legal personnel now able to carry out jury service- result of
Criminal Justice act 2003
s:
● Ordinary people- own ‘justice’/fairness to case
● Judge explains law+how it should be applied- still reach verdict contrary to E that is
morally right(Jury equity- power they have in British legal system)
R V Owen:
○ D son killed by careless driver
○ 12 month sentence- not insured/roadworthy, never passed driving test+blind one eye
○ Owen- sentence insufficient- took own justice
○ Shot driver-Charged attempted murder
○ Obviously guilty- jury understood reasoning- acquitted (morally right)
○ Owen intent to murder driver- still cime regardless circumstances (morally right- not
innocent?)
Kay Gilderdale:
○ 2010 Kay devoted mother charged attempted murder- 31 year old daughter Lynn
○ Lynn-seriously ill 17 yrs- attempted suicide with morphine
○ When failed, mother administered other drugs
○ Kay pleaded guilty-assisted suicide
○ CPS prosecuted for attempted murder
○ Jury acquitted her- morally right
● Popular with public- confidence in system (laypeople aswell- playing important role
criminal justice system)
Juries
● Lay people (ordinary people- no legal knowledge)
● Decide verdict of criminal case- guilty/not guilty (crown Court)
● Jury trial only take place in around 1% cases
● Eligibility for jury selection+qualification contained in Jury Act 1974 + Criminal Justice
Act 2003
● Randomly selected from electoral register
● 18-75
● residency requirements 5+years in UK
● No recent criminal convictions
Role:
● Listen to E- decide guilt/innocence of D
● Advised on law by judge- can take notes/ask Q’s via Judge
● must not speak about case to anyone outside of jury
● Must deliberate in jury room
● Discussions in jury room must remain secret
● Decision they make cannot be questioned
● Sit for 2 weeks (unless been agreed it’ll take longer)
● Jury duty compulsory- possibility of it being deferred for good reason e.g. holidays,
medical appointment etc
● Lawyers, Judges+ other legal personnel now able to carry out jury service- result of
Criminal Justice act 2003
s:
● Ordinary people- own ‘justice’/fairness to case
● Judge explains law+how it should be applied- still reach verdict contrary to E that is
morally right(Jury equity- power they have in British legal system)
R V Owen:
○ D son killed by careless driver
○ 12 month sentence- not insured/roadworthy, never passed driving test+blind one eye
○ Owen- sentence insufficient- took own justice
○ Shot driver-Charged attempted murder
○ Obviously guilty- jury understood reasoning- acquitted (morally right)
○ Owen intent to murder driver- still cime regardless circumstances (morally right- not
innocent?)
Kay Gilderdale:
○ 2010 Kay devoted mother charged attempted murder- 31 year old daughter Lynn
○ Lynn-seriously ill 17 yrs- attempted suicide with morphine
○ When failed, mother administered other drugs
○ Kay pleaded guilty-assisted suicide
○ CPS prosecuted for attempted murder
○ Jury acquitted her- morally right
● Popular with public- confidence in system (laypeople aswell- playing important role
criminal justice system)
