Comments are usually moderated. However, I do not accept any legal responsibility for the content of any comment. If any comment seems submitted just to advertise a website it will not be published.

Friday, 6 April 2018

JURORS` KNOWLEDGE BOUNDARIES

I have posted from time to time on jurors and juries. Use the search box if required to find a few previous contributions. According to an interesting piece in the "Conversation" juror problems are on the increase.  Apart from a fact that really annoys me insofar as jurors do not have to be British citizens nor demonstrate their ability to comprehend possibly intricate constructions in the English language a juror`s individual knowledge which is in conflict with evidence is not addressed. My own professional experience and knowledge when I was active was in direct contradiction of a witness`s evidence. This was not knowledge gained by using the Internet or a reference book which is expressly forbidden for magistrates just as it is for jurors; it was in my memory and for justice to be done I informed my two colleagues with 100% certainty  that the witness had lied. If I had been a juror would demonstrating that knowledge have led to my being reported to the judge and held for contempt?

 With the secrecy of the jury room more closely guarded than a papal conclave I do not know the answer. With judicial hints that judge only trials are likely for one reason or another to become more common such a minor point as above might assume increased significance.  As eligible citizens we have a right to know where the boundaries are? 
Posted by at

4 comments:

  1. Lex6 April 2018 at 17:46

    Interesting.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous7 April 2018 at 09:11

    There have in the past been suggestions that we might have "Professional Jurors" who would presumably have to have certain qualifications, be vetted for their good character and be paid for their services. Surely this would be better than the present system where a goodly proportion of the jury might be foreign nationals or unable to speak/understand English. I could go on, but I'm sure that the point will be taken.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rogerborg7 April 2018 at 13:22

      My concern would be that such a pool would be flooded with idiologues and activists, or crippled by affirmative action virtue signalling quotas. Deliberation might become a case of hang-'em-all vs hug-'em-all.

      Delete
  3. Sub Rosa9 April 2018 at 16:44

    As well as telling your two colleagues about it, I trust the issue that arose from your personal knowledge would also have been shared with the parties in the courtroom to enable representations to be made. It would have been a serious miscarriage otherwise.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)