Juries - Advantages and Disadvantages Flashcards Preview

Law - Unit 1 > Juries - Advantages and Disadvantages > Flashcards

Flashcards in Juries - Advantages and Disadvantages Deck (6)
Loading flashcards...
1
Q

Advantage 1 - Public confidence

A

Point: Jury creates public confidence

Explain: Representative of society, so D is being tried by peers. Public participation in justice system makes it democratic so people have more respect for the system as they believe it is fair.

E.g. Survey by Law society indicates that 80% of those asked would trust a jury more than a judge or magistrate. Furthermore, Lord Devin called a jury trial a “little parliament”.

2
Q

Advantage 2 - Jury equity

A

Point: Creates jury equity, meaning fairness.

Explain: The jury can decide a verdict according to what they think is fair and just. This is known as a decision based on conscience. They also do not have to follow precedents or statutes as they are not legal experts neither do they have to justify their decision by giving reasons for them.

E.g. R v Owen where D’s son was killed by V’s reckless truck driving so he set out to kill V as V had only got an 18 month sentence. D was charged with V’s attempted murder and despite all evidence against him, jury sympathised with D and acquitted him as they also though it unfair to convict him after all he had been through.

3
Q

Advantage 3 - Secrecy

A

Point: There’s secrecy in the jury room.

Explain: Jury is free from pressure and cannot be influenced by others e.g. Bushell’s case. If these discussion were to be made in public, jurors may be inhibited from discussing evidence and less people would wait to serve as jurors.

E.g. Research from other jurisdictions shows that jurors do appear to follow the evidence and take the burden of proof very seriously. This is shown by the higher acquittal rate in the Crown court than in the magistrates’ court.

4
Q

Disadvantage 1 - Perverse decisions

A

Point: Perverse decisions may be made

Explain:Jjurors make a decision which is contrary to the law/ evidence. This could be because they’re ignoring the law/evidence and basing their decision on conscience or due to lack of understanding because the jury is made up of lay people with no legal training (e.g. Vicky Pryce case in which Jury sent note to judge with 10 questions after retiring to consider decision. Some of these questions made it clear the jury didn’t understand their role).

These can decision can be criticised because:

  1. They aren’t legally correct
  2. They create uncertainty in the law
  3. They can deny D the right to a fair trial.

E.g. R v Owen

5
Q

Disadvantage 2 - Secrecy

A

There’s secrecy in the jury room meaning no one else is present and no reasons have to be given for the verdict reached. Therefore we don’t know if jury has understood the case and neither do we know what was actually discussed. We also don’t know what factors may have affected their decision (E.g. Sander v UK D’s race influenced one juror who was making racist comments and jokes in the jury room).

Jurors might also use unlawful methods to reach a verdict:
E.g. R v Young where jurors contacted the two murdered V’s using an ouija board in order to ask them who killed them. Jury returned a guilty verdict.

E.g. Connor and Rollock a coin was tossed to reach a verdict.

6
Q

Disadvantage 3 - Modern technology

A

There is influence of modern technology and high profile cases attract a lot of media attention which might be inaccurate or biased. This is becoming an increasing problem as info about cases can be found on website and discussed on social media. This info is not always reliable and may prejudice jury meaning D does not get a fair trial.

Att Gen v Dallas (same as in advantages)