Jury Duty

[Chickenkeev]

Has anyone ever done it? I've never been called (thank fk!) but i'm curious as to what it's like. In one way it could be really interesting, and in another way it could be really traumatising. And, in the traumatising cases, is there any aftercare?

Chickenkeev, if you are curious, most court cases are open to the public, except if the parties (victims) involved are under age.

I have been called twice (in Canada, but our system is very similar to UK). One was a silly case where the defendant had refused a lawyer and refused to speak. He was occupying a building and had refused to leave, resisted arrest. The witnesses including police were called to testify, and the defendant was found guilty. It was over by midafternoon, and I did find it interesting. I had coverage from my workplace to pay me.

Second time I was called up there were hundreds called as potential witnesses; we all gathered in our local gymnasium. The charges included violence and murder. As names were called people people were excused for either voluntarily excusing themselves on knowing someone involved in the case, or being potentially biased against defendant. It took all day to get enough jurors, and they never called my number. I was very glad, since it could have been traumatic. It turns out that the sitting judge had previously been our family lawyer, so I would have been excused anyway.

On ours, one juror refused to vote not guilty for ages even though it was proven beyond doubt to be a false accusation. His reasoning?

"I just want to see what it feels like to send someone to prison"

Even the judge couldn't do anything about it when we reported the issue. It was only because we pointed out that nobody was going anywhere until it was resolved that he gave in, because he'd miss a trip he had planned.

I was called up and attended, we were told what the case was about and the accused was brought in. but I didn't have to sit for the trial as my name wasn't drawn from the hat.

Awful awful awful. Really bored whilst waiting for a trial. Felt like I was being held hostage - terrible. Uncomfortable holding area.

The trial I eventually got was about 3.5 days. That was interesting. A DV case. No offer of any aftercare.

I'm 44, never been called and I would really like to! Its almost like they know who want to do it, so deliberately don't ask them 😆
My colleague did it and really enjoyed it. She wanted to do a law degree afterwards.

I finished jury duty last week, my experience of it was that it was very boring, lots of waiting around listening for your name to be called, I did 10 days, I got called for 2 trials, the first was going to be over a few months but I was excused as I have a holiday booked and paid for, the second was a very short case over by the next day, then it was back to waiting all day, you usually start off going for ten days but if you get called for a long case that gets extended, you wait to be called, some wait the whole ten days, others like me get the odd case then go back into the jury pool to wait again.
As for the lunch you provide your own, you can claim costs towards it, you can also claim loss of earnings and travel expenses.

I was 25 when I did mine for two weeks and had 2 cases in those weeks.
First was causing serious injury by dangerous driving, very clear cut case, bloke was an arsehole who blamed everyone but himself, some pictures weren't great to witness but glad we did the young lad some justice who was severely impacted by it.
Second was very hard, a son was accusing his dad of things when he was younger (the dad had previously been found guilty of sexually assaulting his child niece). It took a while to get to a conclusion but we did all find him guilty.

It's very long and drawn out, you hear every bit of evidence then the judge repeated it ALL at the end which was very long but I guess needed in case we missed anything. The judge kind of lead you to the conclusion which I found odd...

Lots of waiting around though in the holding room, some people could spend the 2 weeks there just waiting to be called and don't.

You also get a lunch break (they don't provide food), you could go out or stay, but scary to go out if you were in a case and had not so nice people on it.

I did find myself wary walking out of court in case anyone followed me (they give you a big talk on how people could try bribe you in to finding them not guilty etc etc)

Would love to do it again but logistics would be difficult now with a young child.

I was called up, around 28 years ago now - surely I'm due another duty by now?

Soooo much waiting around before being chosen as jury and even during the trial. I was glad to have done it, as it felt like being part of delivering justice - it's an amazing responsibility really. The actual trial was, when we were sitting, fascinating - an insight into how unreliable eye witnesses are (the same man was described as 'asian', 'mediterranean' and 'irish looking' by three different eye witnesses), how phone data is so important to many cases now, and how a good lawyer can make any witness sound completely unreliable on cross examination. Our case was a man who ran someone over and left them with life changing injuries, when on his phone while driving. It's made me a much safer driver, I now keep my phone in my bag so I can't be tempted to even glance at it if a message comes in.

I did it this summer - in Scotland you don’t need to be unanimous, a straight majority will do. The spokesperson has to report whether the verdict was unanimous or majority, but they don’t have to say by how much. We were not allowed to leave at lunchtimes and food was provided (standard canteen-type food). The self-employed people did lose some earnings, but I can’t remember the rules about that because my employer pays for jury service. They told us how to contact them for aftercare if need be - they do provide counselling although not sure how much.

I like the description of it being simultaneously boring and fascinating. There was so much hanging around and filing in and out of court. The whole room was pretty small so you were very close to everyone involved. It was domestic abuse, rape and attempted murder, and even before the defendant opened his mouth it was pretty clear he’d done it, or at least done most of it, but then he pretty much convicted himself during his cross-examination. Listening to the two girls involved and their families was very hard, but at least we got the right result. After the verdict was given it turned out he had an existing conviction for domestic abuse against one of the same women. You could tell that the lawyer for the defence thought he was an absolute arsehole and he wasn’t trying very hard to get him off.

The jury was very respectful and mostly on the same side - there were two men who disagreed that there was sufficient evidence on some of the charges. They thought he’d probably done it but didn’t agree that there was enough evidence to prove it beyond reasonable doubt. However when we went round the room asking for a show of hands there was a clear majority so it didn’t matter.

Also the jury had a special entrance so as not to run into any witnesses/family etc! Not foolproof but at least opening into a different street.

Why would you be exempt as a court journalist? Judges, solicitors and barristers are no longer exempt so I don’t understand why a court journalist would be?
I'm in Scotland where those groups absolutely are exempt.

As for me the names of witnesses often don't mean anything to me but there's been a few times where I've been covering a trial and halfway through I've recognised a witness on sight.

Had I been a juror I would have had to step down.

I did it once - a drugs case with some concealed cocaine and a case of weapons in a car. It was interesting being in a situation with other members of the jury from all walks of life. But a lot of hanging around waiting till be called. I got to know the canteen very well!
I got called up again a few years later but said I couldn't do it as I had very young children.

Called this January spent a week driving across the city to court every day as the public transport stinks where I live. I was never assigned to a case. Only paid expenses for fuel and a meal each day and CFs refused to pay car parking completely so I was down £8 a day. Waste of time but they discharged me at the end of the week because I had been messed around. I was grateful not to be chosen tbh because one of the cases was a really nasty high profile case and went on for 6 weeks.

Lunch? Bring your own sandwiches. You can go out to buy food for lunch while the case is ongoing but once you're in the deliberation room you're not allowed out.

Generally speaking it's really boring. You spend hours just hanging around waiting.

I should add that I know I'm not automatically exempt.
I just consider it a strange set up, sees a solicitor who has not been in the criminal court in 20 years being exempt, but someone who knows the workings of the court and has a higher probability than average of knowing someone involved in the case (whether witness, agents or accused) is not.
Any decent solicitor if they know me would be asking for my removal anyway so it's a bit of a waste of my time and the courts to have me attend anyway IMV.

I've done it once... Very interesting, but so much hanging around and almost wet myself as was so desperate for a wee and the judge wouldn't stop talking in his summing up!

I’m over 60 and finally got called a couple of years ago. It was a stalking/assault case (I forget the correct name for the offence) — a couple who split up, husband wanted to see DC more and resented wife’s new partner. It was all rather sad, and the assault was more a slight scuffle. I had a feeling the wife just wanted XH to stop hanging around her and was quite upset it had come to court.

The jury discussed the evidence we’d heard, but there was no real chat and I don’t think anyone made any new friends, or went to lunch together.

We could have claimed expenses for time off work, travel and lunches, but I didn’t as I’m retired and lived in walking distance.

It was a very interesting experience, even though the evidence was repetitive and went on a long time; I quite understand these things shouldn’t be rushed. I’d do it again if I had a chance.

The fact that you recognise a witness or party or know a little bit about them and their background absolutely does not mean that you would have to step down as a juror either before or part way through a trial. Otherwise no celebrity or well known local person would ever be able to be tried, be a complainant or testify in court!

The disqualification would be if you had a personal relationship with the defendant, the victim or their families or one of the advocates which would render you incapable of being impartial or raise that impression.

This is why the court keeps refusing to accept your claim to be exempt and why court journalists aren’t on the list of exempt professions in Scotland or Northern Ireland.

Lawyers were historically exempt in England because the jurors need to take their direction on law from the judge and cannot substitute their own judgment on this. I assume it’s the same reason why they were and remain exempt in Scotland. Court journalists aren’t legally qualified however often they report court stores and so don’t call into that category.

I did it 9 years ago and was on two trials (and foreman both times!). The first trial I was excused from as I had a connection to the case and was very glad not to have to do that one. The two I did were ok. One theft, one drugs. Lots of sitting down waiting for things to happen though.

You are if you are self-employed.

So i see! I'm wondering what happens it meant you couldn't pay your mortgage because of it. No wonder people try to wriggle out of it.

It’s random. I was called for the first time when EBF dd2 was 3 months old and was excused on those grounds.* My MiL, who’d never been called, would have loved to take my place!

*A Canadian relative who was staying with MiL at the time said that in Canada I’d have had to do it, 3 month old EBF baby or not.
If that was true, I thought it shockingly inhumane.

I did it for the first time recently in my 60s. Boring and so much hanging around. I had a two week case that should never have been in court as all the evidence was vague and hearsay. It was against a homeless person and it felt like the police saw it as an easy win. We found him not guilty in an hour.

I was also a defence witness in another case - again quick not guilty verdict as it just didn’t stand up.

Both totally destroyed my faith in the whole system and I think magistrates should judge most cases as is common in the continent. The whole system needs streamlining and the motives of the police/CPS about meeting targets needs to be reviewed.

Lunch? Basic expenses and fares and I would have been out of pocket if my employer hadn’t agreed to pay me.

I did jury service just over 20 years ago and loved it. Yes, I was nervous at first, but the ushers and staff tell you what is expected of you and offer advice.
The jury fore(woman/ man) usually sits in the first place on the front row, so avoid that seat if you don’t want to deliver the verdict.