Studied by 0 people
Looks like no one added any tags here yet for you.
jury members could use internet research, make inappropriate use of social media or be affected by media coverage of trial
R v West (1996) —> biased leading to unjust verdict or confidential info of trial could be leaked
R v West (1996)
West was convicted of murdering 10 young girls including her daughter, high media coverage, West appealed saying it had made it impossible for her to receive a fair trial (appeal was rejected)
jury tampering - people connected to defendant may try to bribe jurors to make threats against them so they become too scared to find defendant guilty
R v Twomey & others (2009) —> could lead to unfair verdict if not caught
R v Twomey & others (2009)
large robbery from warehouse at Heathrow, 3 trials collapsed due to serious jury tampering, resulted in trial being heard by a single judge
secrecy of decision making - what is discussed in the jury room cannot be investigated
R v Young (1995) Ouija board —> no reason has to be given for verdict so is unclear whether jurors understand everything, can’t be investigation for any possible malpractice
R v Young (1995)
4 jurors used Ouija board in hotel room to try and contact murdered victims which led to jury returning guilty verdict (malpractice)
juries may not understand complex language in court, legal procedure (no intelligence test)
Vicky Price case —> could lead to decisions being made without proper reason so unfair verdict
Vicky Price case
Justice Sweeney said he’d never seen such circumstances where a jury were so confused about all aspects of a case; we’re asking irrelevant questions after being given time to deliberate
