The task of the jury is to weigh up the evidence presented to them and decide on what is true. The judge will direct the jury on points of law but decisions of fact are for them alone to decide.
Assignment 2.12
The jury system was imported to Britain after the Norman Conquest, though its early functions were quite different from what it is today. The first jurors acted as witness providing information local matters and were mainly used for administrative business such as gathering information for the Doomsday Book. Later under Henry II, the jury began to take on an important judicial function, moving from reporting on events they knew about, to deliberating on evidence produced by the parties’ involved in a dispute. Slowly it became accepted that a juror should know as little as possible about the facts of the case before the trial, and this the case today.
A major change in the history of the Jury was the case of Bushell’s case (1670). Before this, judges would try to bully juries into convicting the defendant particularly where the case had crime involved. But in this case it was established that the jury were the sole judges of fact, with the right to give a verdict according to their conscience, and could not be punished for taking a different view to the judges.
The task of the jury is to weigh up the evidence presented to them and decide on what is true. The judge will direct the jury on points of law but decisions of fact are for them alone to decide. In a criminal case, the judge decides on the appropriate sentence; in a civil case the jury will decide what amount of money should be awarded in damages.
The juries only operate in a minority of cases and their role is being reduced to save money. Criminal offences are classified into three groups: summary only offences, which are tried in magistrate’s court; indictable offences, which are tried in the crown court; and either way offences which, as the name suggests, may be tried and in either the magistrates courts or the Crown court. The majority of criminal offences are summarily only, and became there are in general, the least serious offences, they are also the ones most commonly committed. As a result, 95 percent of criminal cases are heard in the magistrates’ court where juries have no role in the court. Juries only decide cases heard in the Crown court, when among the 5 percent of uses heard there the defendant would most likely plead guilty in the cases meaning there is no need for a jury. The result is that juries actually only decide around 1 percent of criminal cases. Even though it is just one percent, this can mean up to 30,000 trials and that are usually the most serious offences, such assaulting a police officer or drunk driving are dealt with in the magistrates court while the most absurd theft can be tried in the Crown court. The use of jurors has been reduced in the recent years. Governments have attempted to reduce the use of juries in criminal cases in order to save money. The Criminal Law Act 1977 removed the right to jury trial in a significant number of offences by making minor criminal offences case summary only. The sentencing power of magistrates has been increased by the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Prior to the Act, magistrates can sentence offenders for up to 1 year for a single offence. The government hopes that by increasing the magistrates sentencing powers , more cases will be tried in the magistrates court rather than being referred up to the Crown Court to be tried by an expensive jury.
