Feeling awful after jury service

[Jn5]

I was on a jury. After some deliberation we came to a verdict, but for me personally it was at no point an easy decision. However the evidence we had meant we had to come to that decision.
Now it has finished, and we can seek out further information that we weren't privy to, and lots of time to run thing over and over again in my head - I’m wondering if the wrong verdict was given.
Just wondering if anyone has been through something similar and how you came to terms with it. I'm struggling today and feeling a lot of guilt regarding the decision I took along with the other jurors.

It’s not a singular decision, you were part of a jury and had the evidence in front of you. You did your job as a collective team and based on what you had . End of

Thank you for your reply. You are right. I keep thinking we’ve failed the ‘victim’ and bad that they will feel that way, let down and down trodden which is part of the reason lots of people don’t come forward. We all had a strong feeling something had happened but not enough evidence or proof regarding the charges themselves. Only a gut feeling.

we can seek out further information that we weren't privy to. You mean Google around for a backstory?

Your job was to decide on the evidence. Anything else would have been raised in mitigation if relevant.

when you’re in the jury you’re advised not to look online for that exact reason, so it wouldn’t impact your opinion on the facts to hand. When I was on a jury what I googled online after wouldn’t have impacted the result of that case, however did show that the person had previously been in court.

You did the best you could with the information you were given at the time. There is quite a high standard for proof in criminal trials and you came to the conclusion you thought right. But I understand how these things can stick in your mind. I'm a magistrate and there's one trial in particular I sat on where I'm sure we gave the wrong verdict as we weren't legally allowed to be given some very crucial extra information (and a bad character reference wasn't put through by the police even though it was supposed to). I still think about that poor victim and hope that she got justice another time as this was a persistent offender. But I'm more angry at the justice system and prosecution case that missed out some key pieces of evidence.

@HoppityBun She said Now it’s Finished they can seek out etc etc.

You had no choice but to come to the conclusion you did. If it helps you any, think how you’d feel if you were the accused and were convicted because the jury had a feeling, rather than on the evidence. It’s shit, but it’s the only way to have a decent system.

Also, remember that a Not Guilty verdict does not mean innocent. It just means that there wasn’t enough evidence to convict. You haven’t called her a liar, or disbelieved her. You did exactly what you were there to do,

So how could he not be guilty?!

If this is actually what happened, it feels very identifiable. Is it fair on the victim to have that out there?

You'll know this - but if you have a question mark now that perhaps the defendant was in fact guilty, it's not enough to reach the standard of proof needed - beyond reasonable doubt.

That is the standard that the law and our society sets and that is the one you applied.

It is imperfect of course and it means that sometimes guilty people get away with it and victims don't get justice.

But it has to be that way - otherwise we'd be depriving people of their liberty on a suspicion or possibility that they were guilty.

Sadly those details are all too common rather than identifying. I served on a jury in a similar sounding case where we found the defendant guilty of several of the charges, but couldn't do so on some of them. The victim had been let down throughout her life including by her own stupid mother when she had spoken up about the abuse.

Juries are told they must be sure the defendant is guilty. That's not a change in the burden of proof, just easier to understand.

I watched a trial recently. It was obvious that , to anyone with any decency, common sense and morals, that the defendant was guilty. But the prosecution pursued a course for which ultimately they didn’t have the right technical evidence. The jury could not convict. But they took a long time.

Maybe there were a number of possible abusers in her life so they couldn't say with certainty the Defendant had been the one who did it

@Hungrycaterpillarsmummy because there was no evidence

This. I was on a jury twenty years ago and there was not enough evidence. I thought they almost certainly did commit the crime but not enough proof. I still think about it OP. Sorry.

@ratherbesurfing

I changed a couple of things to prevent that
And believe me these cases are happening all over the country right now

Thanks for the empathy all

just hope they get their comeuppance in future op.
i am sure they will
and perhaps the victim got some help afterwards.

@Jn5 I had very similar feelings after doing jury service, I suspect it's quite common.

In my case it was clear the accused was guilty, but I completely understood why he did what he did - and I imagine many people would have behaved in a similar manner given the circumstances. So I felt awful having to find him guilty (even though he was) because it didn't seem fair.

Unfortunately you just have to work through those feelings, it's just how our legal process works - feels quite shit though!

I was in a similar jury, child sex abuse and anal rape of the mother, his wife and daughter, along with DV and coercive control. It was historic abuse with no evidence as such just he said she said. It was a difficult decision and several jurors had experienced similar and were crying and very upset. It took us a week, but he found him guilty on all counts in the end. It was the sentence that staggered us. 14 years, with at least two thirds served, for the level of abuse that family lived with was pathetic. We really need to overhaul sentences to make them a deterrent.

I'm sorry you are struggling but I'm sure you all did your best with the evidence provided.

@Ophy83 Exactly that

I feel awful for her , I hope she's been offered more help than we were.
Handed a leaflet for the Samaritans and that was it , discharged and off you go.

unfortunately there are lots of girls with similar stories. So maybe not as identifiable as you’d expect.

I have done jury service - we were very specifically forbidden from googling or otherwise trying to find out any info about the defendant. There was a notice on the jury room wall about someone who’d been caught doing it, and was jailed for 8 months.

She checked afterwards, not during.