• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  • Level: GCSE
  • Subject: Law
  • Word count: 3898

Describe the system of trial by jury within the English legal system.

Extracts from this document...


Law coursework Charlotte Gregory Describe the system of trial by jury within the English legal system. Introduction The concept of trial by jury was first introduced to the British legal system in 1215, when king John signed the Magna Carta. The Magna Carta states that "no free man shall be imprisoned, except by the judgement of his equals, or the law of the land." This introduced that the decision of a persons guilt or innocence would be decided, to some extent, by his or her peers. In 1670, Bushel's case had a great influence on jurors, and the way that the legal system worked. This case established that jurors alone should make the decision of guilt or innocence without interference from the judge. The public felt that with a system, which had public involvement, was a more reliable and democratic system. Another milestone in the history of jurors was the criminal justice act 1967. This act allowed judges to accept a majority verdict of 10-2 instead of only a unanimous verdict. The next big change to the jury system was made in the jury's act 1974. This is where the law setting out what juries should do, and how they should be selected etc. can be found. The final main change to the process of trial by jury was the criminal justice act 2003. This made amendments to the jury's act 1974. In particular it tightened up the laws on who should, and shouldn't serve on a jury. As of April 2004 lawyers, priests, and doctors are now allowed to serve on a jury. This is the way that the jury system runs today. The role of a jury in the British legal system. In the British legal system, the role of the jury is to decide weither the defendant is innocent or guilty. Only about 4% of cases in England and Wales are heard by a jury. ...read more.


There are sometimes two ushers; the jury' usher, and the witness's usher. They guide the jury and witnesses into and out of the court, and administer oaths. A defence representative is the legal representative for the defendant and helps the defence advocate present their evidence. They will take notes as the evidence is given in case the defence needs to refer back to some things they have said later on in the case. The logger records the proceedings, either on tape, or using a modified word processor called a stenograph. The public gallery is an area of the court that is open to the public, if they want to sit in the trial. Members of the press may be in the trial. No jury member is allowed to speak to press. Jury members are sat in a bench of 12 on the trial to give their opinions, hear the evidence and arguments from both the prosecution and the defence representatives, and then make a final decision on weather they think the defendant is guilty or innocent. The jury room. The jury room is where all 12 members of the jury go to discuss the evidence presented in the trial, and then decide on a verdict. The jury must elect a spokesperson to stand up and present their verdict to the court; this person is called the foreman of the jury. Whilst the jurors are in the jury room they are to have no contact with anyone outside the jury room except for giving a note to the usher. The jury are given plenty of time to discuss the evidence and reach their verdict, but in some cases the jury don't always agree. In this case the judge will accept a majority verdict. If the jury cannot reach a verdict, then there is a complete retrial with a new jury. The verdict. When the jury have reached a verdict, the jury will return to the courtroom. ...read more.


The main disadvantage of using this method is there would not be as a wider cross section of society, so less opinions would be heard, and therefore the verdict will not be as fair as it could be. The last alternative to trial by jury is trial by judge and a mini jury of six or seven jurors. The advantages of using this method are; it saves some cost because less expenses have to be paid, it maintains the local knowledge because there are still people from the society having an input in the trial, and finally this method would be more likely to maintain the public's faith in the system because there is still some involvement of ordinary working class people. Although a big disadvantage of using this method is that most of the present problems with a jury would still remain. Conclusion. I think that the current system that we have is a good one, for the simple reason in my opinion, public involvement in the system is a very important factor to consider, if the public wasn't involved in the legal system then there would be no public faith in the legal system, and that will result in a lot of problems. Also trials wouldn't be completely fair, because judges are said to be more prosecution minded, and biased, so the defendant wouldn't get a fair verdict. I understand that there are problems with the current system, but they are problems that in my opinion can be resolved. For example I think that the fact that anyone from the age of 18-70 can serve is a problem, because the people that are randomly selected could have problems, for example they could be illiterate, and would therefore not understand the case fully, so their contribution to the case, and their verdict would not be completely reliable. To resolve this issue I personally think that a basic mathematics and literacy test should be put in place to see weather the jury member would be able to serve, and if their contribution to the case would be completely necessary. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Law 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 GCSE Law essays

  1. Marked by a teacher

    To what extent does random selection of jury members create bias and would jury ...

    5 star(s)

    "drunken experiment".10 Jury selection could provide a solution to this problem by selecting jury members with the knowledge and capacity to give verdicts, which don't rely on unscientific experiments or on how confused the jurors are. This would suggest that jury selection could provide a solution where random selection creates a bias of ignorance, inexperience and confusion.

  2. Marked by a teacher

    Distinguish Criminal law from Civil law in the English Legal System. Outline the jurisdiction ...

    4 star(s)

    Appealing from the crown court to the court of appeal is difficult as the grounds for appeal are narrow and the court of appeal takes a restricted view of its function. The Criminal Appeal Act 1968, as amended by the Criminal Appeal Act 1995, provides the court of appeal shall

  1. Marked by a teacher

    "Within the present system of precedent in the English legal system, judges have very ...

    4 star(s)

    The difference between the two would be that when applying the res judicata principle, the decisions of the courts will be binding on future courts unless it is reversed, whilst the doctrine of stare decisis, established that even if the decision is reversed, past decisions would nonetheless be binding.

  2. Worlds Apart: Orientalism, Antifeminism, and Heresy in Chaucer's Man of Law's Tale

    things; then--a thing which no heresy is described as ever having done--acting as well as teaching according to pagan customs. In the end, Kritzeck comments, while Peter left the decision up to his readers whether to call Islam a Christian heresy or a distinct pagan faith, he himself chose to view it as a heresy.

  1. Criminal Law (Offences against the person) - revision notes

    The objective definition (not seeing the obvious risk) was virtually identical to what would have been gross negligence. Unfortunately in the case of R v Prentice (1994) the COA and later the HOL defined gross negligence in the following ways: - a) The defendant is indifferent to an obvious risk of injury to health --> OBJECTIVE (Caldwell recklessness)

  2. In order to analyse the differing approaches, concerning formalities and incompletely constituted trusts within ...

    The court held that there was no trust imposed upon the daughter and that the daughter merely a 'moral duty to pay reasonable attention to the wishes of the testatrix.' This case shows that the words used are the primary indicator of intention but that it is crucial to understand the context in which the words appear.

  1. Describe the main differences between solicitors and barristers with regard to training and work ...

    Most barristers are advocates, although there are some who are not. When the Courts of Legal Services Act 1990 and the Access to Justice Act hadn't been changed, only barristers had rights of audience in higher courts. Barristers can no longer enjoy this, as solicitors now have the ability to advocate in higher courts.

  2. 'The European Court of Justice played a decisive role in the transformation of the ...

    In the case of Amministrazione delle Finanze v Simmenthal the court ruled that: "Not only by their entry into force render automatically inapplicable any conflicting provision of current law, but also preclude the valid adoption of new national legislative measures to the extent to which they would be incompatible with Community provisions".

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