Bloody jury duty

[jmo21]

Yes they do it in order to avoid jury convicting their client because the jury is hungry or annoyned to have missed Eastenders.

Personally I think people who don't understand the importance of jury service (and by that I mean making all necessary sacrifices) should be disqualified straight away, it should be possible to opt out, however those who do so should automatically opt out from this sort of justice system and, should their time come, get judged by a single judge, without those aweful defence lawyers and of course without jury.

the russian rain man makes an interesting point!

[OwlHoot]

Yes they do it in order to avoid jury convicting their client because the jury is hungry or annoyned to have missed Eastenders.

Personally I think people who don't understand the importance of jury service (and by that I mean making all necessary sacrifices) should be disqualified straight away, it should be possible to opt out, however those who do so should automatically opt out from this sort of justice system and, should their time come, get judged by a single judge, without those aweful defence lawyers and of course without jury.

That's not a bad idea.

Also, I suggest that payments for briefs should be on a sliding scale - a daily downward slide, although the percentage decrement would have to be based on the complexity of the trial somehow. That would soon get them moving.

Also, for multiple serious crimes there should be a return to specimen charges. On conviction the police, by agreement with the court in view of the evidence, could list any other crimes believed to have been committed by the perp, and confirm that they aren't seeking anyone else in connection with these.

[vetran]

Streamline it

Jury service needed but surely both sides could deal with the non contended facts ahead of time and produce a brief for the jurors any adjustment of charges being done beforehand. Only the contentious points could be discussed in court.

AIUI They assume the jury have nothing better to do.

[AtW]

AIUI They assume the jury have nothing better to do.

No - the assumption here is that people who are on the jury would also want to have due process applied to them (should they ever face jury trial) without any "streamlining".

Having said that compensation for jury service should be higher - it is important function for a decently run country and Govt should save money on avoiding unnecessary trials, rather than on getting cheap juries.

[BrilloPad]

I think they should have professional jurors.

And bigger cases could be decided by putting the case on TV and letting the viewers phone in and vote......