• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Explain how jurors are chosen and the role of the jury in a crown court trial

Extracts from this document...


A, Explain how jurors are chosen and the role of the jury in a crown court trial The right to trial by jury can be traced back to Magna Carta (The Great Charter of Liberties, 1215) and the independence of the jury from the judge was established in Bushell's Case (1670). In criminal cases, the jury make the decision whether the defendant is guilty or not guilt. However, this is approximately only 3% of all crimes, and these are heard in the Crown Court. In civil cases, the jury decide if the claimant has proved their case and the amount of damages (compensation). Nevertheless, it is a right in only four types of civil case, which are: defamation over �10,000, malicious prosecution, false imprisonment and fraud. In other civil cases it is discretionary. To be on a jury you need to qualify. To qualify for jury service a person must be aged between 18 and 70, registered on the electoral roll, and they must have lived in the UK for at least five years since the age of 13. ...read more.


The method of selection has changed in the last few years. The old method involved sending out notices and questioning the possible jury so that they could be selected. On September the 4th 2000 juries began to be selected by computer. This was done to make jury service more attractive and stop thousands of people a year evading jury service. The computer selects jurors from electoral rolls, issues summonses and liases with courts on the number of jurors needed. This improved the lot of the juror by eliminating time spent hanging around waiting for trials and sometimes to be never called at all. It also centralised all requests to be excused jury service so that they are treated confidentially and fairly. The selection of juries can be challenged, by either challenging the array or challenging the course, i.e. if the defendant believes the jury is bias. B, Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of using a jury to hear a criminal trial There are a great number of advantages and disadvantages of using a jury to hear a criminal trial. ...read more.


However, despite representing different cultures within society, certain individuals may be prejudice or biased. For example, against the police or racially prejudiced. Such as in the case ofR v Gregory (1993), where a juror showed racial overtones. Media coverage may influence jurors, eg R v Taylor (1993) - newspapers gave false impression of video sequence, and in addition to this, the more recent trial such as the Ian Huntley case. Jurors may not understand the case that they are trying. The Runciman Commission (1992) informed us that just under 10% of jurors admitted difficulty with a case. The juries usually have no legal knowledge or training. A disadvantage linked to this is that there is no intelligence test required. A person may not have to be "intellectual" to be on a jury, but surely a certain amount of intelligence is required for understanding of trials. Other disadvantages include the jury having a financial interest in the length of trials, that "nobbling" may occur, whereby the jury are bribed or threatened, and finally that it is a slow and expensive process, with 12 people needing expenses during the time the trial is on. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Machinery of Justice section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Machinery of Justice essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    ‘Trial by jury is outdated, expensive and ineffective in ensuring justice’ Analyse arguments for ...

    4 star(s)

    'There is no power to create specifically a racial or gender balance or indeed imbalance, on a jury, other than by the random selection process itself' (Davies et al, 1998:209). It has been declared by many academics that random jury selection will never 'guarantee a representative jury' (Sanders & Young, 2000:564).

  2. What justification was there for Socrates' trial, verdict and death sentence?

    If there was thought that Socrates could cause another revolution, there is also conflicting evidence. He acted against the Thirty Tyrants, when he refused the order of arresting "wealthy resident alien Leon of Salamis2", who was to be executed. Socrates instead stayed home, and obviously did not uphold the values

  1. The jury system or right to a trial by jury is often described as ...

    his attendance deferred if he can show good reason to the satisfaction of the summoning officer11 or they may appeal the decision if they are refused.12 Conversely, a judge can discharge a juror if in his or her opinion, the

  2. Describe trial by jury within the English legal system. How effective is trial by ...

    The normal presumption is that, 'unless a person is excusable as of right for jury service, he/she will be required to serve when summoned to do so' (Practice declaration - an excusal from jury service 1988.) Majority verdicts have been allowed in Crown Court and High Court cases if a unanimous verdict is not reached after two hours.

  1. Why do young people join gangs and other subcultures? How does a criminal sub ...

    Though the boundaries may remain ill defined, and the membership may shift in gross numbers and level of commitment, these subcultures constitute definitive human associations for those who participate in them. Biker, hustler, Blood, pimp and prostitute all name sub cultural networks as much as individual identities.

  2. Explain how jurors are chosen and the role of the jury in a crown ...

    Political vetting was being checked by the police and once they were discovered a re trial was immediately ordered. The Attorney General (A.G.) is the person who decided when political vetting was allowed and his conclusions were; that it was only allowed in terrorist cases and national security issues.

  1. Why was the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) created?

    There were three main criticisms in this report; firstly that there was confusion between the functions and responsibilities of the police, the investigators and the prosecution and that there was conflict of interest between the two and the prosecution buyers.

  2. Expert Testimony and Its Value In the Justice System

    Ultimately the Law Commission decided that the best option would be to implement an ?admissibility rule requiring the trial judge to assess the evidentiary reliability of the tendered evidence?.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work