Describe both the qualifications required for juries and the procedure for selecting a jury.
Describe both the qualifications required for juries and the procedure for selecting a jury? The basic qualifications required for jury service are laid down in the Jury's Act 1974. People are chosen from an electoral register at random by a computer. To qualify for jury service a person must be aged between 18 and 70. They must also have been a resident in the UK for at least 5 years since their 13th birthday. The person must be a British citizen. Everyone must take part of a jury service unless disqualified or excused. People with certain criminal convictions cannot sit such as; those who have been sentenced to life imprisonment or a custodial sentence of 5 years or more, those who have served a custodial sentence for public protection or have been given an extended sentence, those who are currently on bail. Those who cannot sit are also the mentally disordered persons. A judge can discharge any person from being a juror if they do not have the capacity to cope with the trial such as not being able to understand English or being blind or deaf. The Juries Act 1974 was amended by the Criminal Justice Act 2003 allows categories of people which used to be excluded able to serve on a jury. This included members of the judiciary and people involved in the administration or justice or the armed forces, the medical professions and MPs. Under the discretionary excusals, people
In order to decide whether or not trial by jury should or should not be abolished, we need to know what it is that we are dealing with and what viable alternative or alternatives there are to it.
In order to decide whether or not trial by jury should or should not be abolished, we need to know what it is that we are dealing with and what viable alternative or alternatives there are to it. I will take a brief look at the history of the jury trial. I will examine the function of the jury; look at what is good and bad about the jury system. Finally I will examine the proposed alternatives to trial by jury that are currently in fashion. The jury system first arrived in Britain after the Norman Conquest. The earliest jury was a body of neighbours summoned by a public officer to give oath as answer to some question1. The sworn inquest was used to enable the recognition on oath of a number of upstanding members of the community to testify to facts which they had personal knowledge. Those called were not judges of fact, but witnesses. By the end of the twelfth century, a person accused of a crime could, on payment obtain the right to obtain a trial by jury. (I will return to this point later when I look at the government's proposals to remove the right to elect jury trial in either way offences) When Pope Innocent III abolished trial by ordeal in 1215 and compurgation (the accused sought to clear himself by his own oath backed up by the oaths of friends and neighbours, who testified to his character rather than to the facts) fell from favour a need arose to find a new
Was the War Measures act necessary for the October Crisis
Was the War Measures Act necessary for the October Crisis? Tony Millar Ms.Shimins Words: 1,252 CHC-2DW There were many events leading to the October crisis, some may say that the decisions taken by the Front de Liberation du Quebec (FLQ) were rational, others not. But any hostage situation when lives are being threatened should be stopped by any means necessary. The War Measures act requested by Premier of Quebec Robert Bourassa, directed by Pierre Trudeau and applied by the Governor General of Canada Roland Michener was a very necessary step to take due to the previous acts of terrorism and threats by the FLQ, prior to October 1970. The October Crisis occurred in October 1970, when two government officials were kidnapped by the FLQ in the province of Quebec. The first kidnapping occurred on October 5th. The victim was British Trade Commissioner James Richard Cross, who was taken shortly after he was leaving work on his way to his car. The second kidnapping was shortly after, on October 10th, when the FLQ kidnapped the Minister of Labour and Vice Premier of Quebec Pierre Laporte, while he was playing football with his nephew. This kidnapping occurred after a meeting with Laporte discussing the threats of the FLQ; after he denied the demands he was quickly taken. The group that took him were the Chenier Cell, a division of the FLQ who were responsible for this and
![Under the current law, homeowners are permitted to use "reasonable force" against intruders.[3] However this standard is criticised for being unclear and weighted too much in favour of the intruders.[4] Under the proposed law, homeowners would be convicte](https://mbt-essays-prod-public.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/950247/listing/950247_1.jpg)
Under the current law, homeowners are permitted to use "reasonable force" against intruders.[3] However this standard is criticised for being unclear and weighted too much in favour of the intruders.[4] Under the proposed law, homeowners would be convicte
Introduction Following the high profile cases of Tony Martin and Munir Hussian,1 the UK Conservative Party has signaled it will introduce new laws providing householders with a stronger defense against criminal liability where they use force to defend themselves against intruders.2 Under the current law, homeowners are permitted to use "reasonable force" against intruders.3 However this standard is criticised for being unclear and weighted too much in favour of the intruders.4 Under the proposed law, homeowners would be convicted only where they used force that was "grossly disproportionate".5 This essay discusses whether such legislative reform is appropriate by first looking at how the current law operates and its main areas of criticism. It then analyses the proposed law and considers whether it adequately improves on the current law. The current law As a general rule in common law, householders are entitled to use "reasonable force" to protect themselves, others or their property.6 This rule provides householders with a justifiable defence against a charge of murder or other levels of assault where they kill or injure the intruder.7 The burden of proving the householders did not act in defence rests with the prosecution.8 The Court has made it clear that "reasonable force" bears the same meaning in the context of defence as section 3(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1967
!['So where does love come in? It's not strictly necessary, is it?' What are Barnes' views of the role of love in history and in this novel? [A History Of The World In 10 1/2 Chapters]](https://mbt-essays-prod-public.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/834991/listing/834991_1.jpg)
'So where does love come in? It's not strictly necessary, is it?' What are Barnes' views of the role of love in history and in this novel? [A History Of The World In 10 1/2 Chapters]
'So where does love come in? It's not strictly necessary, is it?' What are Barnes' views of the role of love in history and in this novel? In this novel, Barnes makes little reference to love in any of the 'main' chapters of the novel, however he explores the concept in some depth in the 'parenthesis' chapter. He seems to display very confused and contradictory views of love, his opinion oscillating wildly as the chapter progresses. Julian Barnes, at the beginning of the chapter, starts to ponder on the necessity of love. He begins by listing various languages' words for 'I love you', and muses upon the concept of tribes without words for the saying. 'Or have they all died out?' he wonders. This seems to be idle thought, in which Barnes merely hypothesises that, perhaps, without love humanity cannot survive. However, he later expands upon and contradicts this idea. 'Our love does not help us survive... Yet it gives us our individuality, our purpose.' States Barnes. It is perhaps worth noting the conclusive tone evident in this phrase; here, he doesn't pose a question, but instead offers an answer. This appears to imply that he has a certain confidence in his answer, that he has reached a personal conclusion in his mind. Therefore, one can read into it that Barnes decisively views love ass being superfluous to survival in practical terms, but is necessary to make us
Jury (Criminal & Civil Trials)
Jury Essay (a) Describe the role of Jury in Civil and Criminal trials. Juries have been used in our legal system for over 1000 years since the Magna Carta which recognized the right to trail by "the lawful judgment of his peers." Since 1215 juries became the usual method of trying criminal cases. The independence of the jury was recognized in Bushell's case (1670) when it was established that the judge could not challenge the decision made. A more modern day example demonstrating that judges must respect the independence of the Jury is R v McKenna (1960) where they threatened the jury that if they don't give their verdict within another 10 minutes they will be locked up for the whole night. Juries are used in both Criminal and Civil cases although the use of juries is very small. Juries are used in the Crown Court for criminal trials of indictment, High Court - Queen's Bench Division, County Court and in some cases the Coroners' Courts. Less than 1% of criminal cases are decided on by a jury this is because 97% of cases are dealt by the Magistrates' Court and from the cases that go to the Crown Court, about two out of three defendants plead Guilty. Juries are used in both criminal and civil cases and the law concerning juries is consolidated in the Juries Act 1974. A jury is defined as a body of persons convened by process of law to represent the public at a trial or
"There is no statutory definition of intention in English law. Indeed, over the past few decades there has been much controversy over the actual meaning of the concept 'intention'". Explain and evaluate this statement.
This essay will deliberate the extent to which the meaning of the concept of 'intention' in criminal law has proven controversial through analysis of pertinent case law and academic critiques. In particular this essay will explore how the concept of 'intention' has changed in various cases in chronological order and the effect this has had. The essay will then focus on the current criticisms of the concept and proposals for reform will be discussed. A conclusion will be made reasoning the extent of controversy that surrounds the concept of intention in both the past few decades and in the present day. In many conduct crimes whereby the defendant's conduct is required to produce a particular consequence, liability can either be based on his intention or his recklessness as to that consequence. The offences that are based on the proof of, and rely on the definition of 'intention' to find liability are most notably the more serious crimes1, with much of the debate on the meaning of 'intention' being centred around the offence of murder2. Nonetheless, intention is not defined in any statute therefore its meaning must be derived from judicial decisions3, thus one would think that such an elementary term would have been definitively defined a long time ago; however this is not the case as we will see. Lord Steyn suggested obiter, in the House of Lords (HoL) judgement of R v
Is dating a truly necessary part of growing up for a teenager? Do you want a teenager to suffer through heart breaks, relationship problems and physical or mental damage?
Essay topic: Dating is a necessary part of growing up for a teenager. Is dating a truly necessary part of growing up for a teenager? Do you want a teenager to suffer through heart breaks, relationship problems and physical or mental damage? No one wants this to happen to our future adults of today, therefore why shouldn't teenagers date? Dating is preparation for marriage, and since it is uncommon for teenagers to be thinking of marriage, dating does not provide any beneficial purposes. However, most people in ancient countries relating to North America, South America, India, Pakistan, Japan and Iran have arranged marriages, and in spite of that those 99 percent of marriages are very successful, and they hardly have any problems of teenage pregnancies or divorces. Then what is the logic of looking for a soul mate in the teenage years? Why do teenagers need to date if they are not mature enough to understand what love is and if they don't know who the perfect boy or girl is? Furthermore, most youngsters only date a person because of their appearance or reputation; this is why 99 percent of them end up getting emotionally hurt. When teenagers date it disturbs their education, they get no work done and end up failing school! In addition, some people say dating helps children or teenagers to socialize, although socialization happens every single day that we are alive. If we
‘Trial by jury is outdated, expensive and ineffective in ensuring justice’ Analyse arguments for and against this statement in relation to the recent changes proposed and the relevant literature
'Trial by jury is outdated, expensive and ineffective in ensuring justice' Analyse arguments for and against this statement in relation to the recent changes proposed and the relevant literature Jury trials have become a contentious point within the English legal system since the Royal Commission on Criminal Justice, or the Runciman Commission, made its report in 1993 (James & Raine, 1993:40). The history of trial by jury can be traced back to the county assize courts and the county quarter sessions of the eighteenth century, where jury trial was used in addition to the presence of judiciary. They were there for the purpose of active participation - interrupting proceedings to ask questions and so on. Since the 1700's however, the jury have gradually become an 'audience' who, despite the entitlement to ask questions at any time, generally do not exercise the right (Emsley, 1997:75). The courts of the time were notoriously corrupt, and juries were a means of the public holding an element of control in the criminal justice system. Trial by jury has changed little in format since its introduction over two centuries ago. It is still a panel of twelve lay-persons, made up of those who are willing to sit on the jury. Under English law: '..the jury system gives ordinary persons a part to play in the administration of justice.' (Keenan, 1998:95). At present, 'ordinary persons'
How important are staff/management relations?
A good relationship between staff and management is one in which each party respects and trusts one another, communicates with and understands one another and understands clearly what is expected of each other. Each party must make a fair contribution towards satisfying the interests of the other party. Demands placed on each other must be reasonable. Compromise and co-operation both play important roles in safeguarding the interests of the business while also satisfying the conflicting interests of it's workforce. It is imperative to build and maintain healthy staff/management relations for the following reasons. Good relations help to prevent disputes and if conflict does arise it can be better resolved between staff and management who have already developed a good working relationship which helps to ensure as little disruption to normal operations as possible. Good staff/management relations lead to high morale amongst a workforce. A happy workforce is a more productive one. The employer will also find it easier to retain its employees. Poor relations can lead to an unhappy workforce and dissatisfied management which is likely to result in reduced productivity and the overall failure of the business. The interests of a company and the interests of it's workforce are often in conflict with each other. A number of practices must be in place in order to simultaneously
