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

Trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution; it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives. More than 50 years later, is this statement still applicable? Should the jury system be abolished?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

"Trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than one wheel of the constitution; it is the lamp that shows that freedom lives.' More than 50 years later, is this statement still applicable? Should the jury system be abolished? A jury is a sworn body of people convened to deliver an impartial verdict. Juries are composed of jurors, who are by definition layman finders of fact, not professionals. The jury trials are now governs by the Juries Act 1974. As Lord Devlin once stated, trial by jury is more than an instrument of justice and more than once wheel of the constitution. It is now been regarded as the lamp that shows that freedom lives. This was written by Lord Devlin in 1956, and the question now is whether this statement can still be applied in the legal system nowadays? To start with, the academic Penny Derbyshire penned an article entitled "The Lamp that Shows that Freedom Lives - Is it worth the Candle? In this article, she argued that jury is no longer seen as representative to the society, they are more likely to be seen as anti-democratic, irrational and haphazard legislator, whose erratic and secret decisions that against the rule of law. ...read more.

Middle

Therefore, the authorities above show that the jury is not competence enough to decide the conviction of defendant. Besides that, it was also argued that the racial bias in the jury brought up a lot of issues. Some claimed that due to the reason that the names of jury are randomly selected, it may not produce a cross selection society. When this happen, one would most likely to face a group of white people though he might have the option to challenge to the array. Even if he can challenge to the array, the court might choose not to accept on the ground that jury was chosen in a random manner as in the case of R v Ford. Therefore, based on the case of Sander v UK, the European Court of Human Rights held that the judge should have discharged the jury on the basis that they have made racist remarks and jokes. Some would also argue that with the technology developing nowadays, the people are provided with many forms of media. This media will indirectly influence the people's life and this does not exclude the jury. ...read more.

Conclusion

Thus, this shows that jury has more compassion than the judge. They are able to give verdict in favour of the public. Based on the disadvantages listed above, it is obvious that the role of the jury may not see as important as last time. Because of that, Sir Robin Auld Lj made a few recommendations in his Review of the Criminal Courts. In relation to racial bias, he recommend that jurors should be more widely representation than they are of the national and local communities and the qualification for jury service should be remained the same. Besides that, no one in future should be ineligible for, or excusable as of right from jury service. Any claimed inability to serve should be subject to discretionary deferral or excusal. In term of perverse decision, he recommends that the law should be declared by statute that juries have no right to acquit defendant if the evidence said otherwise. In conclusion, even though there are disadvantages of the sitting of juries in English Legal System, but since the recommendation of Auld report, the government has tried to work on it by enacting.. . It proves to be success as ...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)

    People have the entitlement to request excusal on such grounds as a holiday which was pre-booked, that they know people involved in the case - perhaps causing prejudice - or for reasons which may cause personal hardship such as difficulties with childcare or wage-loss (Sanders & Young, 2000:559).

  2. 'Juries are anti-democratic, irrational and haphazard.' To what extent do you think that this ...

    the judge oversees the legal aspects to the aspects to the case. A jury must return a unanimous verdict, if it can, but if it cannot, a majority verdict of 11 to 1 to 10 to 2 will be accepted, provided the jusry discusses the case for at least tow ours and ten minutes.

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

    Similarly a person who at any time in the last ten years served any part of a sentence of imprisonment or a sentence of detention, or had passed on him a suspended sentence of imprisonment or a suspended order for detention or has received a community order, community rehabilitation order,

  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. Outline the rights of a defendant to legal representation and bail

    Unrepresented defendants have the right to have a 'McKenzie friend' in court with them. This person can sit with the defendant, take notes, and offer quiet suggestions, but is not allowed to address the court. This right was established in a case called McKenzie v McKenzie3, but since many courts

  2. The UK Constitution

    of tradition, "a generally accepted political practice, usually with a record of successful applications or precedents",2 and it would be very unlikely for a person not to consider themselves bound by a convention. It is generally adhered to that a constitution, a manner of law superior to all others, is

  1. Expert Testimony and Its Value In the Justice System

    In fact the statement that they must have ?more opportunity of judging? than the ordinary person makes it seem that a person with just slightly more knowledge than the lay person would be qualified to stand as an expert. In practice it is highly unlikely that a person who has

  2. The English Court System

    Some cases start and finish in the magistrates court however, some criminal cases may be transferred to the Crown court. The magistrate’s court deals with minor offences such as fines up to £5000 and imprisonment of six months. The function of the magistrate’s court is to give judgment criminal and civil cases.

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