Jury Service

[Jillyanne]

As a 'spin-off' from the Stephen Lawrence thread, who on here (or knows anyone who) has done Jury Service, I personally would love to but being pessimistic I would get a really boring case. If you have done, what was it like (I appreciate that details cannot be discussed) just interested to know.

[Pedro]

I'm gutted that I've reached my mid 60's and never been on jury service, would love to sit on one in a tasty case, like to read real crime books.

[bridge too far]

Mr TF was called about a year ago. He went into Oxford, sat there for a morning and was sent home without sitting. Wasn't called back.

[Clapham Saint]

A former colleague of mine did it. Said it was one of the most boring things she'd ever had to do. I think it's a LOT less interesting than you'd hope in 99.9% of cases (pun intended)

[Verbal]

I've never been asked, which is probably just as well. My wife has, though. She was dreading it, and managed to put it off for a while. But when she did it she found the whole experience fascinating. Most of all though - contrary to those on here who perhaps have only been escorted into a criminal court in a nice windowless van - she found that the jury she was on was for the most part careful with the evidence and scrupulously fair.

[trousers]

Got called up about 15 years ago. Winchester crown court. Sat on 2 GBH cases for about 4 days in total. Lots of sitting around in-between cases and even getting sent home when not called onto a case on one or two days.

 

Was an interesting experience from the perspective of finding out how it all worked but it wasn't edge of seat stuff...far from it...all very mundane.

[dune]

I have.

 

Initially I was supposed to be on a case against some animal rights activist and thought nice one, but the cps dropped the case as it was supposed to start.

[swannymere]

It's alot of sitting around and waiting and being bored, you also learn how much wastage in time and money in the legal system. Got two minor theft cases over the the week period each lasting 2 days, got called in on four days only to be sent home at 1pm and the other two days i wasn't needed. Both cases were bang to rights but we had a couple of jurors on one trial who wouldn't convict as they worried about the sentence the accused would get, even tough it was pointed out to them that this isn't in our remit. Found it interesting when actually on a jury and because the cases were minor they had junior barristers, there is something quite sexy about a well-spoken young woman going for the accused ;-)

[Saint in Paradise]

I mustn't and won't say very much about the specific case I was a juror on. However I found it quite

interesting as my wife and I had nearly bought the building concerned a few years ago.Now when the

Judge told us that some evidence had come up only a few minutes ago that woke up a couple of people.

The Judge and Lawyers would discuss whether "we" should be told as it could be indeed be very important.

As it turned out it did in fact cast even more doubt about the credence of one of the main witnesses.

It didn't alter my thoughts as I was already confident about whom I believed, but it did alter the thoughts

of 4 others on the jury. In the end All 12 of us reached the same decision within a few hours.

It was the one type of case I really didn't want as it was an allegation of sexual assault, I was hoping for

a drug case ( very common here ).

 

IF you are called I say go and do it but really concentrate out of fairness to both sides.

 

 

 

.

[dronskisaint]

I mustn't and won't say very much about the specific case I was a juror on. However I found it quite

interesting as my wife and I had nearly bought the building concerned a few years ago.Now when the

Judge told us that some evidence had come up only a few minutes ago that woke up a couple of people.

The Judge and Lawyers would discuss whether "we" should be told as it could be indeed be very important.

As it turned out it did in fact cast even more doubt about the credence of one of the main witnesses.

It didn't alter my thoughts as I was already confident about whom I believed, but it did alter the thoughts

of 4 others on the jury. In the end All 12 of us reached the same decision within a few hours.

It was the one type of case I really didn't want as it was an allegation of sexual assault, I was hoping for

a drug case ( very common here ).

 

IF you are called I say go and do it but really concentrate out of fairness to both sides.

 

 

 

.

 

It's not actually a choice over here...if you're called you have to have a very good reason why you can't to get out of it.

 

I've not been called but a couple of my staff have - one had the waiting around for 4 days while legal arguments were had and then she was sent away as the case was adjourned for 8 months. As yet she has not been called back and it's been 2 years.

[Toomer]

I got called up about ten years ago, got sent home on the Monday sat on a rape case the rest of the week and an arson case the first three days of the second week as many have said there was a lot of sitting around. Best part of it I got paid by the state for jury service and the company I worked for at the time never deducted any money from my wages for the days I sat as I went into the office on the days I got sent home.

[Saint Mikey]

I hit the mother load with Jury service last year and got a 12 week case. Fully paid from work, expenses from the Court. The WC was on and 10-4 generally, with plenty of later starts and early finishes. The case was pretty interesting too and I was the foreman, so was a good experience. I'd recommend it to anyone...

[hypochondriac]

A former colleague of mine did it. Said it was one of the most boring things she'd ever had to do. I think it's a LOT less interesting than you'd hope in 99.9% of cases (pun intended)

 

Yep. My father said exactly the same.

[bridge too far]

It's not actually a choice over here...if you're called you have to have a very good reason why you can't to get out of it.

 

I've not been called but a couple of my staff have - one had the waiting around for 4 days while legal arguments were had and then she was sent away as the case was adjourned for 8 months. As yet she has not been called back and it's been 2 years.

 

I think, but I'm not absolutely sure, that once you've done a stint you won't ever be called back.

[saint_bert]

I did it a few years back.

 

Sat there till midday Monday then got sent home. Came back on the Thursday, did a case that lasted two days and was not needed the following week.

 

My advice to anyone who gets called, take a book!

[miserableoldgit]

I did it a few years ago. I was there for a week and we sat on three cases, two violence related and one attempted fraud. I served as Foreman of the Jury on one case. I actually quite enjoyed it.

[JackanorySFC]

Well it's case closed according to Verbal... The reason you all aren't/ havnt done jury service is apparently because jurors are frequently in their 20's & 30's. 40+? sorry no chance. Ever.

[swannymere]

Well it's case closed according to Verbal... The reason you all aren't/ havnt done jury service is apparently because jurors are frequently in their 20's & 30's. 40+? sorry no chance. Ever.

 

That's a crock, 8 of the people on my jury were over 50 and the majority of people attending jury service during my two weeks were over 40.

[St_Tel49]

It's alot of sitting around and waiting and being bored, you also learn how much wastage in time and money in the legal system. Got two minor theft cases over the the week period each lasting 2 days, got called in on four days only to be sent home at 1pm and the other two days i wasn't needed. Both cases were bang to rights but we had a couple of jurors on one trial who wouldn't convict as they worried about the sentence the accused would get, even tough it was pointed out to them that this isn't in our remit. Found it interesting when actually on a jury and because the cases were minor they had junior barristers, there is something quite sexy about a well-spoken young woman going for the accused ;-)

Yes, I had that experience too. We eventually returned a 10:2 majority verdict because two women wouldn't commit ( I suppose they didn't want to convict an innocent man) but when he was convicted and they read out his list of past offences (as long as both arms) their jaws nearly hit the floor. At the end of the day -if he had been innocent he could have appealed. I found the experience interesting but, as someone else said, there is a heck of a lot of wasted time in law courts. They could save a lot of money just by working longer hours and making the process more efficient.

Edited 16 November, 2011 by St_Tel49
spelling

[St_Tel49]

I think, but I'm not absolutely sure, that once you've done a stint you won't ever be called back.

Not so - I have done two - although the second was a coroner's jury which was a very different kettle of fish from criminal courts - in some ways it is much less formal and also interesting in its own way. We actually did two cases in a day.

[The Cat]

I did it about 7 years ago in Southampton. Was a suspected child abuse case which was slightly grim. Lasted 5 days all in all. Fascinating really to see how it works and how the people in the jury come to their conclusions.

 

As soon as we started deliberating one bloke on the jury said straight out, "can we just all agree he's guilty so we can go home?" After 2 days of deliberating we ended up with no overall majority. I'm still not sure whether the bloke was guilty or not as neither side were particularly convincing and there were huge holes and inconsistencies in the prosecution case. They were pushing for a retrial but I'm not sure if it ever happened.

 

Was a real mix of people. One old bloke said that the whole process had reaffirmed his faith in human nature because we all went about it in such a civil way.

[bridge too far]

Not so - I have done two - although the second was a coroner's jury which was a very different kettle of fish from criminal courts - in some ways it is much less formal and also interesting in its own way. We actually did two cases in a day.

 

Aah you're right. Just googled and discovered that you can't be called again if you've been on a jury in the previous two years.

[St_Tel49]

I did it about 7 years ago in Southampton. Was a suspected child abuse case which was slightly grim. Lasted 5 days all in all. Fascinating really to see how it works and how the people in the jury come to their conclusions.

 

As soon as we started deliberating one bloke on the jury said straight out, "can we just all agree he's guilty so we can go home?" After 2 days of deliberating we ended up with no overall majority. I'm still not sure whether the bloke was guilty or not as neither side were particularly convincing and there were huge holes and inconsistencies in the prosecution case. They were pushing for a retrial but I'm not sure if it ever happened.

 

Was a real mix of people. One old bloke said that the whole process had reaffirmed his faith in human nature because we all went about it in such a civil way.

I agree with this. The two women in our jury who wouldn't commit, though misguided, did it for the best of reasons.

[norwaysaint]

Well it's case closed according to Verbal... The reason you all aren't/ havnt done jury service is apparently because jurors are frequently in their 20's & 30's. 40+? sorry no chance. Ever.

 

I though this sounded an odd thing to say, so I went to find the thread and quote you're referring to. For some reason you seem to be being quite dishonest about what he said.

 

Jurors are frequently in their twenties and thirties.

 

He didn't mention over forties at all, you just made that up. He doesn't even say people in that age group are more common than any others. He just says that they are frequently there. That could be a jury with one person in their twenties and the rest over forty happening several times. If you believe in yourself in an argument, you should just stick to the facts.

[warsash saint]

Did jury service down in P*rtsmouth about 15 years ago ... had a tax evasion case funnily enough

 

My Dad got called exactly the same time aswell !!

[Pugwash]

I did jury service about 3 years ago. Two cases, the first one slightly unsavoury, but not clear cut. I was foreman, found not guilty on a majority decision after some lengthy delberation. Second one was a fraud case brought up from P*rtsmouth - unanimously guilty with a very quick decision.

 

Thoroughly rewarding experience and it was pleasing how everyone on both juries treated the whole process very seriously. Incidentally, on both juries about half of us were aged 40+.

[CHAPEL END CHARLIE]

I've done Jury service - twice.

 

Given the utter tedium of my horrible job and my experience that jury service is both socially useful and (at times anyway) interesting, I wouldn't mind doing it again.

[Baj]

My mum did a murder trial last year, guy was found guilty. It affected her quite a bit at the end, seeing the victims family hear the verdict etc. Dont wish jury service on anyone...

[Baj]

Well it's case closed according to Verbal... The reason you all aren't/ havnt done jury service is apparently because jurors are frequently in their 20's & 30's. 40+? sorry no chance. Ever.

 

My mum's in her 60's (see above post)

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

I've never been called, but isn't there a limit to the number of times you can potentially be called?

[Saintandy666]

I've never been called, but isn't there a limit to the number of times you can potentially be called?

 

I think if you have done it within a certain recent period of time(is it 2 years?), you can say no, but other than that you can defer, but eventually you have to do it basically as many times as you ask I think. I was reading up on this on the directgov website the other day!

[Jillyanne]

Is being called up completely random from the Electoral Roll or is it means tested in some way?

[saints-cris]

Very recently got the news I have to do this in about a month. When do you find out how long you will be needed/how many cases you serve on?

[Saintandy666]

Is being called up completely random from the Electoral Roll or is it means tested in some way?

 

Random. From electoral role.

 

http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/CrimeJusticeAndTheLaw/Juryservice/DG_072707

 

Between 18 and 70, lived in UK for 5 years since 13, no jail over 5 years, no jail in the last 10 years and you can opt out if you have serious commitments(don't know what that would entail) or done it in the last 2 years.

[dune]

I think if you have done it within a certain recent period of time(is it 2 years?), you can say no, but other than that you can defer, but eventually you have to do it basically as many times as you ask I think. I was reading up on this on the directgov website the other day!

 

The youth of today are just so crazy with their antics.

[hypochondriac]

If you are self employed you can get out of it.

[Saintandy666]

The youth of today are just so crazy with their antics.

 

One day the 'youth' are too wild for you and undisciplined. The next day they are boring and not fun. What are we? Make up your mind already. And was your comment really necessarily, you've just bought the thread off topic.

[dune]

One day the 'youth' are too wild for you and undisciplined. The next day they are boring and not fun. What are we? Make up your mind already. And was your comment really necessarily, you've just bought the thread off topic.

 

Can you say that again in English please.

[Verbal]

If you are self employed you can get out of it.

 

Not really. You can defer, and they do sometimes make exceptions, but being self-employed is not a recognised excuse.

[badgerx16]

Been called up twice, and got excused twice : first time was Southampton Courts when I was at Uni in Wales, second my work informed them I was on a critical time sensitive project and couldn't be given the time out.

[Dimond Geezer]

Been called up twice, and got excused twice : first time was Southampton Courts when I was at Uni in Wales, second my work informed them I was on a critical time sensitive project and couldn't be given the time out.

 

I didn't realise you could be excused twice, I thought if you deferred once, you had no choice the second time.

This assumption was based entirely on the Julie Waters drama on tv last week.

[dune]

I didn't realise you could be excused twice, I thought if you deferred once, you had no choice the second time.

This assumption was based entirely on the Julie Waters drama on tv last week.

 

I think you fail to grasp the importance of checking peoples wheelie bins, or some other equally vital task of the public sector non jobber.

[stu0x]

I mustn't and won't say very much about the specific case I was a juror on.

Why? The case is over, you can discuss it as much as you want.

 

My personal experience is that the whole trial system is a hideous relic of a bygone era that is all to do with theatre and convention and very little to do with ensuring justice is done.

[stu0x]

This assumption was based entirely on the Julie Waters drama on tv last week.

That programme was about as realistic as an episode of CSI

[badgerx16]

I didn't realise you could be excused twice, I thought if you deferred once, you had no choice the second time.

This assumption was based entirely on the Julie Waters drama on tv last week.

 

2 different district courts - first in Southampton, 2nd in Preston.

[badgerx16]

I think you fail to grasp the importance of checking peoples wheelie bins, or some other equally vital task of the public sector non jobber.

 

You are a pig-headed, bigoted, buffoon, whose only source of gratification is to troll the Internet.