Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the Jury system?
Please support your answer with academic opinion.
Introduction
The England and Wales jury system, first introduced by King Henry II during his reign has been
a key institution which has defined the English Legal System for many centuries. Originally, the
role of a juror was to report crimes within their community and name the people who were
involved but since then, the jury system has undergone several changes and developments
shaping it into what it is today. In the modern age, the jury is comprised of twelve members of
the public who listen to the evidence of a trial and decide whether a person is guilty beyond all
reasonable doubt. But this begs the question of whether introducing ordinary citizens into legal
deliberations truly aid in bringing justice. This essay will evaluate the advantages and
disadvantages of the jury system to conclude its feasibility within the justice system whilst
considering the impartiality, potential biases and the emotional impact experienced by jurors
during legal proceedings.
Eligibility of the Jury System
The Juries Act 1974 states a specific eligibility criterion for an individual to be summoned to
serve as a juror. To be summoned, one must be between eighteen and seventy-six years of age as
well as be registered as a parliamentary or local government elector. In cases where these
requirements are met but the individual is unable to serve their time, the Act allows them to
request for an excusal. Individuals with a mental illness, a disability, have full time carer
responsibilities, or are a new parent unable to serve for at least twelve months1 do not have to
1
https://www.gov.uk/jury-service/delaying-or-being-excused-from-jury-service Author, ‘Article Title’
(Website Name, Date) <URL> accessed date
, complete jury duty. One can also be excused if they have completed jury duty within the past
two years. Furthermore, there are also conditions that can cause a person to be excluded from
completing the service such as those with a criminal record. The Criminal Records Bureau
automatically conducts checks on jurors to screen out ineligible individuals during the selection
process2.
Main Body
The jury system has been criticised for the emotional and psychological impact it can have on a
juror’s mental health. In severe cases, the jurors will have to hear and view graphic evidence of
cannibalism, necrophilia, child pornography and more which can be emotionally and
psychologically overwhelming. Josie T. Romero, head of the Family and Children Division of
the Santa Clara County Community Mental Health Administration claims that “what jurors
endure in a courtroom triggers immense anxiety, stress and in some cases, mental illnesses”3.
This creates a sense of controversy on the relevance of trial by jury as although many view it as a
civil duty, quite often jurors must endure a trauma experience in which they receive minimal
support. Is it truly necessary for members of the public to experience psychologically damaging
cases to be considered a noble citizen of society? Mark Farrant4, CEO of the Canadian Juries
Commission and former juror attests for the negative impacts of jury service. He had been
assigned to witness a gruesome first-degree murder case that had displayed visceral images and
videos of the crime scene and the autopsy of the victim. Farrant claimed that he would wake up
in cold sweats in the middle of the night due to the horrifying nature of the images seen in court.
Even after the case had been closed, Farrant struggled to readjust to life and would “relive
2
https://unlock.org.uk/advice/juror-jury-service/
3
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/31/archives/when-a-jury-hears-details-too-gruesome-to-bear.html
4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVESSWFuSoY&ab_channel=CanadianJuriesCommission
Please support your answer with academic opinion.
Introduction
The England and Wales jury system, first introduced by King Henry II during his reign has been
a key institution which has defined the English Legal System for many centuries. Originally, the
role of a juror was to report crimes within their community and name the people who were
involved but since then, the jury system has undergone several changes and developments
shaping it into what it is today. In the modern age, the jury is comprised of twelve members of
the public who listen to the evidence of a trial and decide whether a person is guilty beyond all
reasonable doubt. But this begs the question of whether introducing ordinary citizens into legal
deliberations truly aid in bringing justice. This essay will evaluate the advantages and
disadvantages of the jury system to conclude its feasibility within the justice system whilst
considering the impartiality, potential biases and the emotional impact experienced by jurors
during legal proceedings.
Eligibility of the Jury System
The Juries Act 1974 states a specific eligibility criterion for an individual to be summoned to
serve as a juror. To be summoned, one must be between eighteen and seventy-six years of age as
well as be registered as a parliamentary or local government elector. In cases where these
requirements are met but the individual is unable to serve their time, the Act allows them to
request for an excusal. Individuals with a mental illness, a disability, have full time carer
responsibilities, or are a new parent unable to serve for at least twelve months1 do not have to
1
https://www.gov.uk/jury-service/delaying-or-being-excused-from-jury-service Author, ‘Article Title’
(Website Name, Date) <URL> accessed date
, complete jury duty. One can also be excused if they have completed jury duty within the past
two years. Furthermore, there are also conditions that can cause a person to be excluded from
completing the service such as those with a criminal record. The Criminal Records Bureau
automatically conducts checks on jurors to screen out ineligible individuals during the selection
process2.
Main Body
The jury system has been criticised for the emotional and psychological impact it can have on a
juror’s mental health. In severe cases, the jurors will have to hear and view graphic evidence of
cannibalism, necrophilia, child pornography and more which can be emotionally and
psychologically overwhelming. Josie T. Romero, head of the Family and Children Division of
the Santa Clara County Community Mental Health Administration claims that “what jurors
endure in a courtroom triggers immense anxiety, stress and in some cases, mental illnesses”3.
This creates a sense of controversy on the relevance of trial by jury as although many view it as a
civil duty, quite often jurors must endure a trauma experience in which they receive minimal
support. Is it truly necessary for members of the public to experience psychologically damaging
cases to be considered a noble citizen of society? Mark Farrant4, CEO of the Canadian Juries
Commission and former juror attests for the negative impacts of jury service. He had been
assigned to witness a gruesome first-degree murder case that had displayed visceral images and
videos of the crime scene and the autopsy of the victim. Farrant claimed that he would wake up
in cold sweats in the middle of the night due to the horrifying nature of the images seen in court.
Even after the case had been closed, Farrant struggled to readjust to life and would “relive
2
https://unlock.org.uk/advice/juror-jury-service/
3
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/01/31/archives/when-a-jury-hears-details-too-gruesome-to-bear.html
4
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVESSWFuSoY&ab_channel=CanadianJuriesCommission
