AC2.5 Discuss the use of lay people in criminal cases
(6 marks)
Specification Requirements
Content Amplification
Laypeople Learners should be able to discuss
● Juries the strengths and weaknesses of
both juries and lay magistrates.
● Magistrates
, Juries
The role of juries: Juries are responsible for deciding the verdict of criminal cases
that are only in the crown court, juries are used in roughly 1% of criminal cases. To
decide the verdict they listen to both the prosecutions and defences evidence and
arguments. Jurors are members of the public who are randomly selected by the
electoral register; those selected must attend court as it’s compulsory, but people
may not meet the criteria like, if they are on bail or have been in prison for over 5
years. People may be deferred from the requirement due to medical appointments or
paid holidays. Jurors must meet the requirements under The Juries Act 1974: being
aged between 18-70, having the right to vote and having lived in the UK for over 5
years. Jury service lasts 2 weeks and the jury includes 12 members. Juries will
choose their verdict in secret, it’s an offence for jurors to discuss. The decision they
choose is never questioned.
Juries - strength 1: One strength of Juries is that they do not share the same rules
as Judges. When making decisions they solely consider what they believe is fair. For
example in the RVs Kronlid case the defendants damaged a jet that was going to be
used to kill the population of East Timor. The jury allowed this reasoning and found all
defendants weren’t guilty despite them confessing and all the evidence proving they
did it. This means juries have the freedom to give different decisions based on
specific situations they don’t need to follow laws or precedents (jury equity). Also they
can take societal views into account and make moral decisions based on this. As a
result they give more fair and just verdicts.
Juries - strength 2: Another strength of Juries is that they have varying
backgrounds and represent a vast section of the community that have different
backgrounds. For example 3 courts were researched and it was found there was no
gender imbalance. 88% of juries at the courts had an equal or near equal male to
female ratio. Also the Jury Diversity Project said the process of choosing jurors does
not discriminate against Black and Minority Ethnic (BME). This is a strength as there
is equality in the courts between male and women and more race diversity, so there
is less likely to be discrimination. This results in fairer outcomes and fewer
miscarriages of justice.
1
(6 marks)
Specification Requirements
Content Amplification
Laypeople Learners should be able to discuss
● Juries the strengths and weaknesses of
both juries and lay magistrates.
● Magistrates
, Juries
The role of juries: Juries are responsible for deciding the verdict of criminal cases
that are only in the crown court, juries are used in roughly 1% of criminal cases. To
decide the verdict they listen to both the prosecutions and defences evidence and
arguments. Jurors are members of the public who are randomly selected by the
electoral register; those selected must attend court as it’s compulsory, but people
may not meet the criteria like, if they are on bail or have been in prison for over 5
years. People may be deferred from the requirement due to medical appointments or
paid holidays. Jurors must meet the requirements under The Juries Act 1974: being
aged between 18-70, having the right to vote and having lived in the UK for over 5
years. Jury service lasts 2 weeks and the jury includes 12 members. Juries will
choose their verdict in secret, it’s an offence for jurors to discuss. The decision they
choose is never questioned.
Juries - strength 1: One strength of Juries is that they do not share the same rules
as Judges. When making decisions they solely consider what they believe is fair. For
example in the RVs Kronlid case the defendants damaged a jet that was going to be
used to kill the population of East Timor. The jury allowed this reasoning and found all
defendants weren’t guilty despite them confessing and all the evidence proving they
did it. This means juries have the freedom to give different decisions based on
specific situations they don’t need to follow laws or precedents (jury equity). Also they
can take societal views into account and make moral decisions based on this. As a
result they give more fair and just verdicts.
Juries - strength 2: Another strength of Juries is that they have varying
backgrounds and represent a vast section of the community that have different
backgrounds. For example 3 courts were researched and it was found there was no
gender imbalance. 88% of juries at the courts had an equal or near equal male to
female ratio. Also the Jury Diversity Project said the process of choosing jurors does
not discriminate against Black and Minority Ethnic (BME). This is a strength as there
is equality in the courts between male and women and more race diversity, so there
is less likely to be discrimination. This results in fairer outcomes and fewer
miscarriages of justice.
1
