In and , minor criminal cases are heard without a jury in the ' Courts. Middle ranking "triable either way" offences may be tried by magistrates or the defendant may elect trial by jury in the Crown Court. Serious "indictable" offenses, however, must be tried before a jury in the Crown Court. Juries sit in a few civil cases, in particular, defamation and cases involving the state. Juries also sit in 's courts for more contentious inquests. All juries consist of 12 people between 18–70 years of age, selected at random from the register of voters. In the past a unanimous verdict was required. This has been changed so that, if the jury fails to agree after a given period, at the discretion of the judge they may reach a verdict by a 10-2 majority. This was to prevent jury tampering in cases involving organized crime.
The main role of a jury in a case is to decide, after considering all the evidence given and points made, the outcome or verdict of the trial. A juries role differs in criminal and civil cases, though in both the jury have perhaps the most important job and the biggest responsibility.
The judge gives the jury precise instructions about the law that must be applied to the case. The judge outlines the facts the Crown must prove in order to establish the guilt of the accused, and advise jurors of the duties they must carry out when they leave the courtroom to consider their verdict (deliberation). This is called charging the jury.
At the end of the jury charge, the case is in the hands of the jury and the jury leaves the courtroom to the jury room to deliberate. The jury chooses a foreperson, reviews the evidence and reaches a verdict in accordance with the instructions of the judge. If the jury requires further instruction or clarification of some point, it may contact the judge, who takes appropriate action. Once the jury has withdrawn to consider its verdict, members of the jury may not communicate with anyone outside of the jury room except jury ushers and then only for the purpose of contacting the judge. In a criminal trial, the verdict in a case can only be reached by the complete or unanimous agreement of the 12 jurors. Their duty is finished and the judge will discharge them when the foreperson announces the jury's verdict in open court.
The most common use of juries today is in the Crown Court, where they decide a verdict of guilty or not guilty. Cases heard in the Crown Court are most often serious criminal cases including murder and rape; however, jury trials account for less than 1% of criminal trials because most cases are dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court.
In a typical trial, the jurors will hear the case presented by both the defence and , and then a summing-up and some direction on the law from the . They then retire to a private room as a group to consider a , and decide if the defendant is of guilty or not guilty. Generally, there are no restrictions on how a jury may proceed to reach such a verdict, and there is no set time limit on how long they may deliberate for. Traditionally, a jury is expected to come to a unanimous verdict, but if after around two hours no verdict is forthcoming, the judge may recall the jury and instruct them that they are prepared to consider a majority verdict. This means that a verdict of either 10-2 or 11-1 will be accepted.
As jurors have no legal training, and have no obligation to supply reasons for their verdict, they are able to decide a verdict on their idea of ‘fairness’, commonly known as jury equity. Occasionally, a jury may find the defendant "not guilty" even if they have violated the law, simply because the jury may believe that a specific law is invalid or unjust.
Sometimes a jury will take into account a wider view than simply the judge's summing up, and will reach a verdict influenced by or based on their view of the case presented by the media. This is particularly true of high profile cases, however the fact that the media may influence jurors is seen to be a strong disadvantage, as the defendants may appeal against their conviction arguing they haven’t received a fair conviction.
In order for juries to fulfil their role in analysing the main facts of the case, there are strict rules about the information they use during the trial. Jurors must not learn about the case from any source other than the trial, nor can they conduct their own investigations such as visiting the crime scene independently. Nobody involved with the trial should to speak with a member of the jury, and jurors are not supposed to read news or other accounts of the trial. In order to achieve this goal in high-profile cases, some juries are sequestered either for the deliberation alone, or for the entire trial.
In civil cases juries are now only used in limited circumstances, but have two roles when they do sit in civil cases. The first is to decide if the claimant has sufficiently proved their case, and then if they decide that the claimant has won their case, they will judge and decide the amount of damages that should be paid by the defendant. When a jury is used in the High Court, there will be twelve people sitting, but in the County Court a jury will consist of eight people.
It is stated in the County Courts Act 1984 that a person may only have the right to have a jury trial in the following types of civil cases; defamation, false imprisonment, fraud, and malicious prosecution (4). These cases are all based around both character and reputation, and a judge may still refuse a jury trial in these cases if it involves complex documents or scientific evidence, as is it considered to be unsuitable for jury trial.
It was effectively the decision made during Ward Vs James (1966) that stopped the use of juries in personal injury claims, when a plaintiff attempted to claim for injuries caused in a road accident. The court has now stated that an example of where a jury might be appropriate in a personal injury claim would be if injuries had resulted from somebody deliberately misusing their authority, meaning that there could potentially be a claim for exemplary damages.
In conclusion I think now a days the jury system is often described as the 'jewel in the crown' or the 'corner-stone' of the British criminal justice system.
