Advantages/Disadvantages of Juries

Advantage - Juries maintain confidence in the legal system

- used for over 1000 years in the English Legal system and are well supported by the public

- Lord Devlin 'they are the lamp that shows freedom lives' a defendant to be tried by their peers is beneficial compared to judge/mags

- jurors have no loyalty to D so can be fair and serve 2 weeks so are not 'hardened'

- gov. research 2009 says 69% of the public agree the right to jury trial is important and should keep its current form

Advantage - Fair/balanced in decision making

- having 12 differing POVs can only be beneficial, doesn't involve one person having all the power to decide

- allows for compromise/discussion and avoids bias

- if all 12 jurors reach the same decision or even a majority decision it is likely that the correct outcome has been achieved

Advantage - Independent

- where a judge will be bound to follow the law in all cases, jury can express their opinions

- R v Ponting: the jury acquitted Ponting even when he had clearly broken the Official Secrets Act and leaked Ministry of Defence documents

- jurors are also free from pressure and should not be influenced by anyone

- R v McKenna: judge threatened jury to return a verdict within 10 minutes or they would be locked up all night, decision quashed

Advantage - Representative of society

- jurors are chosen by random which ensures there is a broad mix of people

- a survey of 84 courts: in 81 of them black + EMG juries were not under-represented, also showed that juries reflected the local population

Advantage - The jury system keeps the legal process simple

- judge asks jury for a unanimous verdict

- P + D need to convince all 12 members of jury of their side

- case proceeds at the speed of the slowest juror

- lawyer avoids speaking in legal terms which the juror will not understand

- reasonable to assume if jury can understand case, D can understand case

Disadvantage - Inconsistent and unreliable

- subjective nature of juries mean that different jury panels could reach different decisions and could lead to D not receiving a fair trial

- jurors have no legal training: may make decisions without considering legal impact

- can ignore evidence on decisions that are wrong in law

- R v Young: jury found D guilty of murder based on contacting V with Ouija board while drunk

- R v Owens: D not found guilty of attempted murder as jury sympathised with his reason for trying to kill V

Disadvantage - The secrecy of the jury system

- Contempt of Court Act 1981: criminal offence for jurors to discuss the process by which they reach a verdict

- potential problems with jurors such as not understanding a judge's direction will not be identified

- won't be certain whether jurors are fulfilling their role or not as they don't need to explain reasons for verdict

- R v Mirza: ruled enquiries into discussions couldn't take place even when a juror had stated others thought use of interpreter was a ploy

Disadvantage - Media influence

- high profile cases have likely been reported in the media before the case comes to court

- difficult for jury to only use evidence presented in case, they do not have the professional training to resist influence

- R v West: argued jury's exposure to press coverage denied her right to a fair trial, CoA held correct directions by the judge to the jury would ensure fairness

Disadvantage - Juries are acquittal minded

- standard of proof in Criminal Court is beyond any reasonable doubt, if jury has any doubt they should find defendant not guilty

- due to lack of legal expertise and worry of convicting wrong person juries acquit 60% of defendants compared to 20% in Magistrates

- downside is guilty person is let free

Disadvantage - Jury nobbling

- jury is influenced to reach a verdict by bribes/threats of violence

- jurors do not get special protection: can vote under threats

- Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1944: criminal offence to intimidate/ harm juror physically or financially

- CJA 2003: case can be heard by a single judge if there is a real risk of nobbling

- R v Twomley: trial without a jury after multiple acquittals in connection to robbery - cost gov £20m