To think that if people are forced to do Jury service...

(95 Posts)
Pseudonym99 Mon 29-Jul-13 19:21:42

...against their will, then you cannot expect them to take it seriously, abide by the rules and they shouldn't be held responsible when they break those rules? And how can it be in the interests of justice to have jurors there who do not take it seriously or do not want to be there?

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23495785

stargirl1701 Mon 29-Jul-13 20:16:11

Professional jurors?!!!! Dear God, abandon democracy now.

nickymanchester Mon 29-Jul-13 20:16:38

If you read the link in the OP, then the jurors weren't behaving like that because they didn't want to be there. They made those comments in public as they were GLAD that they had the opportunity to be on a jury and convict the type of person that they don't like.

It is much more likely that your typical MNetter will not wish to do jury duty and will be savvy enough to work out how they can get out of it.

There was an interesting case reported by the BBC earlier this year about how much the average juror understands the system:-

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21529452

hiddenhome Mon 29-Jul-13 20:17:24

Governments get the population they deserve and years of dumbing people down has led to idiots like this - people who are incapable of taking things seriously.

People don't know how to be decent citizens any more sad

60sname Mon 29-Jul-13 20:18:50

Hollyberrybush 'peers' means equals, not just equal in age

Onesleeptillwembley Mon 29-Jul-13 20:21:25

Ok, don't make people do jury duty, but have some other public duty instead. If they object to everything then they cannot have recourse to the public purse, NHS, or any other privilege of being a citizen (avoiding the word subject).

Xmasbaby11 Mon 29-Jul-13 20:23:33

YABU!

MalcolmTuckersMum Mon 29-Jul-13 20:24:58

Round of applause to Bumpotato and hiddenhome

<<<wanders off wondering about 'bum potatoes'>>>

mumblechum1 Mon 29-Jul-13 20:27:10

I agree with Onesleep. If people really can't be bothered to do JS then they should have to do some other community service in its place.

(easy for me to say, though, I have a life-long exemption due to former employment).

Onesleeptillwembley Mon 29-Jul-13 20:28:14

Me too, Mumble, but I would gladly do it.

Forgetfulmog Mon 29-Jul-13 20:28:54

OP seriously??? YABVVVU.

I just don't get why anyone would do what they did, especially the whole posting comments on fb, ffs!

bluesbaby Mon 29-Jul-13 20:35:46

Holly your mates might have told you that but Ican guarantee you they would have to have had proper justification for the final decision.

bluesbaby Mon 29-Jul-13 20:42:22

The case before mine (on jury) got thrown out because a juror befriended the defendant on the lunch break and told him the feedback from other jurors! So stupid!

LillethTheCat Mon 29-Jul-13 20:46:41

Id love to go on Jury service. Maybe one day

DameFanny Mon 29-Jul-13 20:55:48

Frankly Holly I'm judging you by the company you keep

ReindeerBollocks Mon 29-Jul-13 20:58:31

Mumblechum - the Government changed the law to allow members of the legal profession to sit on a jury, so you may not be exempt after all.

Secondly, I think that jury duty is a very important public service, and should be taken seriously, plus it is trial by peers, but this means a cross section of society, not people who are similar in age nor other background features. These idiots who abused JD deserve everything they get.

However, there has been discussions about making professional jurors for complex fraud trials, in which trial juries often get confused and unable to understand the terminology. I know some of the barristers struggle with those cases due to the complexity, so it would make sense to have a professional jury in these cases, who were neutral but would be able to understand the legal issues and financial issues of such frauds.

In all other cases jury duty should exist and using these people as examples serves to show that jury duty should be taken seriously.

HollyBerryBush Mon 29-Jul-13 21:09:11

'peers' means equals, not just equal in age

I know that - I was avoiding saying what I was really thinking grin on grounds of inverted snobbery

And there was a movement to introduce professional jurors at the time I studied law. I happen to agree with it.

mumblechum1 Mon 29-Jul-13 21:13:04

Mumblechum - the Government changed the law to allow members of the legal profession to sit on a jury, so you may not be exempt after all.

Yes, I know, but I also used to work for the Ministry of Justice, so am still exempt.

I think smile

Onesleeptillwembley Mon 29-Jul-13 21:14:13

Think you may be, Mumble that's my situation.

HollyBerryBush Mon 29-Jul-13 21:14:29

Are you damefanny I guess I'm ok because shes dead now. Hope that cheers you up a bit and I can guarantee I'm resocialised adequately

ReindeerBollocks Mon 29-Jul-13 21:17:59

blush yes, still exempt then! I just assumed otherwise.

That shows how stupid I am for making assumptions. Sorry about that.

beatback Mon 29-Jul-13 21:30:51

If you were Unfortunate to have to go to Crown Court (Not your Fault) or innocent of the charges and your fate was in the hands of 12 people on a jury with 3 people half a sleep, 1 person texting 2 people who cant speak english properly, or understand what is being said. Another person who does not like your hair colour and 1 person with a chip on his shoulder and your fate is left in the hands of people like that then it really is pot luck whether you are convicted. Even though you may be totally innocent and this is one reason (Another Thread) the Teacher who pushed youths in to a bush pled guilty at Magistrates Court. He was not prepared to risk the possibilty of a much stiffer Sentence. If his case had these type of people on the Jury any type of outcome could have been possible.

DameFanny Mon 29-Jul-13 21:32:21

The point is Holly did you SIOB when she told you or think "fair enough"?

sonlypuppyfat Mon 29-Jul-13 21:38:21

My worry about being called up for jury duty is what if I couldn't understand what was going on eg a complex fraud case or something like that.

mumblechum1 Mon 29-Jul-13 21:48:39

More danger of dying of boredom, sonlypuppy grin.

gallicgirl Mon 29-Jul-13 21:50:28

I have a relative who Is a crown court clerk and she thinks there should be a minimum education level for jurors on fraud cases. They cost thousands and take ages because evidence has to be explained to jurors.
Sometimes the fraud cases are declared mistrials because the jurors don't understand the complexities and are unable to make decisions. Professional jurors are a step too far though.

Let's hope the sentence for contempt comes with a citizenship course.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now