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

The duties of Magestrates and Juries.

Extracts from this document...


Part A) Magistrates have a large range of duties, but they are mainly connected to criminal cases, totaling more than two million cases a year. However, Lay Magistrates deal with some civil cases; these tend to be family cases. Out of all criminal cases, 97% of them are dealt with by Lay Magistrates and in the other 3%, Lay Magistrates will hear the preliminary hearings, such as Early Administrative Hearings, and some Committal proceedings. To hear family cases including protection orders such as the protection against violence there is a special panel of Magistrates. Lay Magistrates will also decide bail after a suspected offender has been arrested and charged. The defendant may be released on bail by the police, but it is otherwise the magistrates' duty to decide whether he should be bailed or remanded in custody pending trial. In a summary trial the magistrates are the sole judges of fact and law (though they may seek the Clerk's advice on matters of law), and must determine an appropriate sentence in the event of a conviction. ...read more.


The jury's role in a criminal trial is to act as judge of fact. Sometimes there is a direct conflict of evidence and the jury must then use their experience of human nature in deciding who to believe is right. In other cases, there are more complex issues of reasonableness to be resolved, and the jury's task would be more difficult. A juror should have experience of life rather than on any specialized legal knowledge making it appropriate that it should be left to them, such as in R v Litchfield in 1998, when a ship foundered off the Cornish coast and three crewmembers were drowned. Having allegedly followed an unsafe course and relied too heavily on his engines even though he knew the fuel was contaminated the ship's master was tried for manslaughter. Affirming his conviction and sentence of 18 months' imprisonment, the Court of Appeal said it is up to the jury to decide whether negligence is gross negligence. They rejected an argument that since negligently endangering a ship is a statutory offence, it is nonsense to let the jury decide whether a defendant's behavior amounts to a crime: the question for the jury is whether it amounts to the crime of manslaughter. ...read more.


They refused to find the defendants guilty as instructed, in spite of being shut up without food or drink, and following their verdict the Recorder of London directed they be imprisoned for contempt. Vaughan CJ granted a writ of Habeas Corpus for their release; once the jury has given their verdict, the judge has no option but to accept it. In section 17 of the Criminal Justice Act 1967, if defendant pleads not guilty and the prosecutor proposes to offer no evidence, the court may order that a verdict Of not guilty be recorded, or the jury to be directed return such a verdict. This was carried out in the R v Ferguson case in 1970 when the defendant was charged with driving after the consumption of excess alcohol. The defendant pled not guilty, but the facts were undisputed. There was an argument as to the validity of the procedure adopted. The Deputy Chairman ruled that the procedure was valid and directed the jury to return a verdict of guilty. The direction was upheld by the Court of Appeal. Law Homework 7: Lay People 5/4/07 Daniel Shuck Page 1 of 3 ...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

    In order to decide whether or not trial by jury should or should not ...

    4 star(s)

    Also section 54 of the criminal procedure and investigation act provides that where a person has been acquitted of an offence and someone is subsequently convicted of interfering with or intimidating jurors or witnesses in the case then the high court can quash the acquittal and the person can be retried.

  2. Does Hart's theory differ to the 'gunman writ large' situation?

    Hence the command theory is content-independent describing rules as posited by the sovereign. Hart's account is another example, in his case the rules are based on practices. The practice theory of norms is flawed, argues Raz. The practice theory i.e.

  1. What is an indictable offence and how is it brought to trial?

    The procedure can be used to review the legality of EU regulations, directives or decisions, on the grounds that proper procedures have not been followed, the provisions infringe the treaty or any rule relating to its application, or powers have been misused.

  2. Contact orders

    (change of surname) 1996 1 FLR 791 held that the views of adolescent children usually prevail in issues of contact and residence. See Family Procedure Rules Rule 9.2A - representation Sawyer - The competence of Children to participate in family proceedings (1995)

  1. The Law Relating to Negotiable Instruments

    The banker will be held guilty of negligence in such a case and will not be entitled to the protection given under Section 131 (where a banker acting bona fide will not be liable to the true owner, if he receives payment of a crossed check for a customer whose title is defective).

  2. essay discussing the advantages and disadvanteges of lay magistrates

    inadequate powers, and send the case to the crown court for trial. Overall this means that the case will go to the crown court if either the magistrates or the defendant thinks it should. The case can only go to the magistrates' court if both the parties agree on it.

  1. Discover whether, in the criminal law, negligence ever breaks the chain of causation and ...

    It is shown here that the accused must have been able to prevent the crime. In this case D was driving a cart recklessly when a child ran out in front of him and was killed. It was held that D was not liable for the girl's death because even

  2. Should juvenile offenders be treated differently to adult offenders?

    The NSW Government is also determined to assess the legal principle of Doli incapax which it is assumed that children aged between 10 to 14 years are incapable of knowing that criminal activity is wrong. Youth Justice Conferences: promote youthful offenders to take accountability for their actions and to discourage them from reoffending.

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