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

The Jury

Extracts from this document...


The Jury Before 1972, those who owned their own home and were over a rateable value were eligible for jury service. The Morris Committee in 1965, estimated 78% of names on the electoral register didn't qualify for jury service, 95% of women were also ineligible, either because they lived in rented accommodation or were wives. The committee recommended the right to do jury service should correspond with the right to vote. That reform was brought in by the Criminal Justice Act 1972 and can also be found in the Juries Act 1974. To be eligible for jury service you must be aged between 18-70, you must be registered on the electoral register and must have lived in the United Kingdom, Channel Islands or Isle of Man for at least five years since the age of thirteen. ...read more.


The judge would usually defer the juror rather than totally excuse the juror until the juror can continue with jury service. There is also a term called discharge, this is where there is doubt about a juror's ability to serve on the trial for example the juror may have language problems or deafness. The judge will decide whether to discharge the juror. In section 41 of the Criminal Justice and the public order act 1994 it states that the judge can discharge the juror, if the person in the judges eyes is not capable of acting effectively as a juror because of a physical disability. Computers randomly produce a list of potential jurors; this is done from the electoral register. Summonses are sent out to the potential juror with a form to return stating that the person can or cannot attend jury service stating approximate reasons. ...read more.


Lords Deming and Shaw, condemned vetting in security and terriost cases because it was not stated in the Juries Act 1974 and they said that it was an invasion of privacy. The role of the jury is to decide whether or not the accused is guilty or not guilty. The jury may take notes while in court, and are also given documentary evidence or photographs. When it is time for the jury to make a verdict, they are taken off to another room to discuss the case and all of the evidence; the jury are not allowed to discuss the case to anyone at all apart from the judge and other jurors. If a juror does discuss the case with anyone else he will be held in contempt of court and will face a fine or sentence. For example; if the juror was talking to the defendant or giving him lifts to the court, he would automatically be dismissed from jury service. ...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. 'Is the jury the

    Trust in the system is progressively fading and there are many factors, which suggest that the corner stone of the legal system be inherently flawed. "The lamp that shows freedom lives"... in other words, the symbolic function of the jury surpasses its practical significance.

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

    of 18 serving on a jury who may be an easy prey to bribery or intimidation'. Also they are not mature enough to arrive at a proper verdict. Some people may argue that too many people are qualified to sit as jurors regardless of their literacy or experience and may be intimidated and bewildered to ask questions.

  1. The Canadian Justice system towards aboriginal offenders

    The advent of the sentencing circle for aboriginal offenders has provided the most viable alternative to the traditional sentencing practices of the Canadian criminal justice system. The structure of the sentencing circle has not deviated substantially from the original model proposed by Justice Stewart, with the exception of slight modifications reflecting the magnitude or significance of the case.

  2. Expert Testimony and Its Value In the Justice System

    that they would put a bad light upon the person that he had been hired to defend. Although expert witnesses are supposed to stay impartial and provide their accurate, professional opinion it is unlikely that this will happen when they are being paid vast sums of money by one of the parties involved.

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