2.5 Discuss the use of lay people in criminal investigations
Juries
The jury consists of 12 members of the public who sit in a box to one side of the judge. The
jurors are charged with the responsibility of deciding whether, on the facts of the case, a
person is guilty or not guilty of the offence the defendant has been charged for. Jurors are
selected at random and can be anyone on the electoral register aged between 18-75.
However, some individuals are disqualified from jury service, such as those with criminal
convictions. Jury duty is compulsory unless someone is under extreme personal
circumstances.
One strength of juries is that they can provide layman's equity. This is where a jury reaches
a decision which is a contradiction to the law but is for the greater good. This was shown in
the case of R v Owen, where the defendant's son was killed by a reckless driver whose truck
was not roadworthy or insured. The driver also did not have a license. Owen then shot the
truck driver and was charged with attempted murder. In this case Owen was obviously guilty
but the jury acquitted him due to the fact they thought Owen did the right thing even though
the law states otherwise. This is a strength as the case demonstrates how justice is upheld
in different ways; if the judge had considered the verdict the defendants would have been
found guilty under the law, but as the jury's verdict stands, the defendant cannot be charged
for the crime. Another strength of juries is they provide better decision making, impartiality
and fairer trial. With there being 12 people on every jury, allows for a more thorough
examination of evidence with numerous options considered. Therefore, if the defendant is
found guilty by 12 people, with all evidence and opinion considered, it is likely that the verdict
is correct. The jury system is also extremely democratic, as all 12 members have an
individual vote, this means no one individual is responsible for the verdict on the case and
the verdict will be decided from what the majority of juries have voted.
However, a weakness of juries is jury tampering. This involves attempting to communicate
with one or more jurors in an effort to sway the outcome or decision of the case. This can
lead to a misccariage of justice and an unfair trial, therefore the prevention of this is
incredibly important. In the case of Twomey, he and three other defendants were on trial for
attempting to rob 10 million pounds from a warehouse. After three trials the judge concluded
there was a serious attempt of jury tampering after receiving information from the
prosecution and the jury was suspiciously reduced to 9 at the second trial. To prevent jury
tampering from happening in this case, a Lord Chief Justice decided to hold a juryless trial
and instead a judge would also jury the case. Another weakness of a jury is the media may
influence their decisions. If a juror does research during the trial and sees something in the
media it can influence a jury's decision. This is against the law to do as jurors are only meant
to judge the case based on the evidence put in front of them. For example, in the case of
Theodora Dallas, who researched a defendant's past who was on assault charges, found
that he had previously been convicted of rape. Dallas then shared the information with fellow
jury members and was consequently sentenced to 6 months in prison for contempt of court.
Having a jury also costs a lot for the court. For example, allowances are paid to jurors to
compensate for loss of earnings or benefits. Out of pocket expenses such as travel are also
paid for by court. Taking into account there are 12 jurors, this is going to result in a large
sum of money being spent, especially if the case is long lasting as the wages will have to be
paid for, for a long period of time.
Juries
The jury consists of 12 members of the public who sit in a box to one side of the judge. The
jurors are charged with the responsibility of deciding whether, on the facts of the case, a
person is guilty or not guilty of the offence the defendant has been charged for. Jurors are
selected at random and can be anyone on the electoral register aged between 18-75.
However, some individuals are disqualified from jury service, such as those with criminal
convictions. Jury duty is compulsory unless someone is under extreme personal
circumstances.
One strength of juries is that they can provide layman's equity. This is where a jury reaches
a decision which is a contradiction to the law but is for the greater good. This was shown in
the case of R v Owen, where the defendant's son was killed by a reckless driver whose truck
was not roadworthy or insured. The driver also did not have a license. Owen then shot the
truck driver and was charged with attempted murder. In this case Owen was obviously guilty
but the jury acquitted him due to the fact they thought Owen did the right thing even though
the law states otherwise. This is a strength as the case demonstrates how justice is upheld
in different ways; if the judge had considered the verdict the defendants would have been
found guilty under the law, but as the jury's verdict stands, the defendant cannot be charged
for the crime. Another strength of juries is they provide better decision making, impartiality
and fairer trial. With there being 12 people on every jury, allows for a more thorough
examination of evidence with numerous options considered. Therefore, if the defendant is
found guilty by 12 people, with all evidence and opinion considered, it is likely that the verdict
is correct. The jury system is also extremely democratic, as all 12 members have an
individual vote, this means no one individual is responsible for the verdict on the case and
the verdict will be decided from what the majority of juries have voted.
However, a weakness of juries is jury tampering. This involves attempting to communicate
with one or more jurors in an effort to sway the outcome or decision of the case. This can
lead to a misccariage of justice and an unfair trial, therefore the prevention of this is
incredibly important. In the case of Twomey, he and three other defendants were on trial for
attempting to rob 10 million pounds from a warehouse. After three trials the judge concluded
there was a serious attempt of jury tampering after receiving information from the
prosecution and the jury was suspiciously reduced to 9 at the second trial. To prevent jury
tampering from happening in this case, a Lord Chief Justice decided to hold a juryless trial
and instead a judge would also jury the case. Another weakness of a jury is the media may
influence their decisions. If a juror does research during the trial and sees something in the
media it can influence a jury's decision. This is against the law to do as jurors are only meant
to judge the case based on the evidence put in front of them. For example, in the case of
Theodora Dallas, who researched a defendant's past who was on assault charges, found
that he had previously been convicted of rape. Dallas then shared the information with fellow
jury members and was consequently sentenced to 6 months in prison for contempt of court.
Having a jury also costs a lot for the court. For example, allowances are paid to jurors to
compensate for loss of earnings or benefits. Out of pocket expenses such as travel are also
paid for by court. Taking into account there are 12 jurors, this is going to result in a large
sum of money being spent, especially if the case is long lasting as the wages will have to be
paid for, for a long period of time.
