AC2.5
Laypeople are ordinary members of society with no specialised legal knowledge. Juries and
magistrates are both examples of laypeople.
Juries
Juries are made up of 12 laypeople randomly selected from the electoral register. They
listen to the evidence in court and decide whether the person on trial is guilty ‘beyond all
reasonable doubt’. The jury have a four-fold role where they have to: weigh evidence,
decide on which facts are true, listen to the judge’s direction on the law, and apply the facts
they hear to reach a verdict. People aged 18 to 75 are eligible to do jury duty. People are
excluded if they are on bail, on probation, or completing community service. Those who
have served over 5 years in jail are excluded for life whilst those with shorter sentences are
excluded for 10 years. Juries are used in cases involving serious offences and some triable-
either way offences, that are tried in the Crown Court. 95% of cases are tried in the
magistrates’ court but of the remaining 5% tried in the Crown Court, most involve the
defendant pleading guilty or the judge instructing that the jury to acquit them. So, juries
only actually make the decision in about 1% of cases (about 30,000 trials a year). The Jury
Act 1974 is the main act governing the jury system.
One strength of juries is that they have jury equity. This means that juries are allowed to
return verdicts that coincide with what they believe is morally right rather than by what is in
the law. This allows defendants to be judged on their specific circumstances rather than by
the law which is generalised. Kay Gilderdale was a mother who pleaded guilty to the
assisted suicide of her daughter but was instead charged with murder. At trial the jury
acquitted her as they believed she had done the right thing. This case was dependant on the
juries’ opinions which led to Kay avoiding jail time, as they thought she did the right thing,
and so found her not guilty. Another strength of juries is that they judge cases for fairly. A
study was done into whether juries were racially unbiased, involving interviews with over
1,000 jurors and looking at 68,000 jury verdicts. No link was found between all white juries
and a higher tendency to convict black or Asian defendants (in Winchester and Nottingham).
This information suggests that jurors treat defendants equally. Black, Asian, or minority
ethnic defendants often chose to be tried at the Crown Court, as they think they will get a
fairer trial here than at the magistrate’s court.
One weakness of juries is jury tampering. This is the use of bribery or intimidation of jurors,
perverting the course of justice. This is usually used to get a defendant acquitted. This
means that jurors sometimes need to be protected by the police using methods such as
accompanying them to court. In 2002, over £3.5 million was spent protecting juries. There
was suspected jury intimidation used in the Tony Martin case, a man who shot a burglar in
his home. This case was more unusual as intimation was allegedly used to get the jurors to
find him guilty, while usually intimidation is used to try and get a verdict of innocent. In this
case, Tony went to prison for 3 years. Perhaps the verdict would have been different if this
intimidation hadn’t happened. Another weakness of juries is media influence. A study into
whether juries are fair found that 35% remembered pre-trial coverage in high-profile cases
Laypeople are ordinary members of society with no specialised legal knowledge. Juries and
magistrates are both examples of laypeople.
Juries
Juries are made up of 12 laypeople randomly selected from the electoral register. They
listen to the evidence in court and decide whether the person on trial is guilty ‘beyond all
reasonable doubt’. The jury have a four-fold role where they have to: weigh evidence,
decide on which facts are true, listen to the judge’s direction on the law, and apply the facts
they hear to reach a verdict. People aged 18 to 75 are eligible to do jury duty. People are
excluded if they are on bail, on probation, or completing community service. Those who
have served over 5 years in jail are excluded for life whilst those with shorter sentences are
excluded for 10 years. Juries are used in cases involving serious offences and some triable-
either way offences, that are tried in the Crown Court. 95% of cases are tried in the
magistrates’ court but of the remaining 5% tried in the Crown Court, most involve the
defendant pleading guilty or the judge instructing that the jury to acquit them. So, juries
only actually make the decision in about 1% of cases (about 30,000 trials a year). The Jury
Act 1974 is the main act governing the jury system.
One strength of juries is that they have jury equity. This means that juries are allowed to
return verdicts that coincide with what they believe is morally right rather than by what is in
the law. This allows defendants to be judged on their specific circumstances rather than by
the law which is generalised. Kay Gilderdale was a mother who pleaded guilty to the
assisted suicide of her daughter but was instead charged with murder. At trial the jury
acquitted her as they believed she had done the right thing. This case was dependant on the
juries’ opinions which led to Kay avoiding jail time, as they thought she did the right thing,
and so found her not guilty. Another strength of juries is that they judge cases for fairly. A
study was done into whether juries were racially unbiased, involving interviews with over
1,000 jurors and looking at 68,000 jury verdicts. No link was found between all white juries
and a higher tendency to convict black or Asian defendants (in Winchester and Nottingham).
This information suggests that jurors treat defendants equally. Black, Asian, or minority
ethnic defendants often chose to be tried at the Crown Court, as they think they will get a
fairer trial here than at the magistrate’s court.
One weakness of juries is jury tampering. This is the use of bribery or intimidation of jurors,
perverting the course of justice. This is usually used to get a defendant acquitted. This
means that jurors sometimes need to be protected by the police using methods such as
accompanying them to court. In 2002, over £3.5 million was spent protecting juries. There
was suspected jury intimidation used in the Tony Martin case, a man who shot a burglar in
his home. This case was more unusual as intimation was allegedly used to get the jurors to
find him guilty, while usually intimidation is used to try and get a verdict of innocent. In this
case, Tony went to prison for 3 years. Perhaps the verdict would have been different if this
intimidation hadn’t happened. Another weakness of juries is media influence. A study into
whether juries are fair found that 35% remembered pre-trial coverage in high-profile cases
