The Jury is a body of people who are lay, meaning that they are not legally qualified. Jury trials have become a contentious point within the English legal system. Trial by Jury is an ancient and democratic institution, meaning everybody has a say, the jury make it a trial of ones peers and in certain cases it is the jury’s job to inject a certain amount of fairness and democracy, this only happens if they think the law is unfair. A good case that illustrates democracy is the case of R v Pontin.

In the United Kingdom, the jury panel is selected at random, but there are three main exceptions. All those involved in the administration of justice, from judges to prison officers, are ineligible to serve. Those convicted of offences and given a severe sentence are disqualified from serving for a period that varies according to the sentence. Certain other people, such as medical and armed forces personnel, also have the right to be excused from serving.

Computers are used to produce a random list of potential jurors from the electoral register, aged between 18 and 70, and have had to be residents of the UK, Channel Islands or Isle of Man

for at least 5 years since they were at the age of thirteen. It has been declared by many academics that random jury selection will never 'guarantee a representative jury'. The use of the electoral roll as the means of selecting people for jury service naturally means that some of the population will be excluded, as not everyone is entitled to vote, let alone taking into account the various exceptions under the Juries Acts and so on. The claims of Lord Devlin in the 1970's that juries were primarily made up of white, middle-aged men from middle-class backgrounds was absolutely justified, as at the time, the majority of people registered to vote were exactly that. Research believes that up to twenty percent of black and Asian people never actually register to vote here in the UK. Once the selection has taken place summons are then sent out attached with a form to return, confirming that the persons does not fall into any of the disqualified or ineligible groups. From the resulting list the jury panel is produced. If selected, a citizen is obliged to serve on the jury. The Jurors receive a set of notes explaining a little of the procedure of the jury service and the functions of the juror. The normal length of jury service is approximately two weeks but due to some cases it can last longer. Jury service is compulsory for all those not disqualified, ineligible or excused and failure to attend on the specified date or unfitness through drink and drugs is a contempt of court and can even result in a fine. In many ways it can be seen as slave labour, but it does not break the European Convention right to Liberty as it is seen as a public duty.

“We couldn’t make head or tail of the case or follow all the messing about that the lawyers did. None of us believed the witness on either side anyway, so we made up our minds to disregard the evidence on both sides and decide on the merits of each case”

The 1988 revisions to the guidelines confirmed that as a rule, juries should be chosen at random, with people being excluded, only under the statutory exceptions above. The proper way for the prosecution to exclude a juror was by a challenge in open court rather than secretive computing checks. But it is also stated that vetting might be necessary in certain special cases them being, those involving terrorism, where it was felt that a jurors political beliefs might prevent him or her being impartial or lead to undue pressure on other jurors, those who are being protected by the national security.

In this overhaul, Auld also wanted to see many changes to jury selections. He felt there was a need to ensure the jury picked for a trial was representative of the local community, as well as the nation, and to see the numerous exclusions to be reduced solely to two - criminal history and mental illness. The amalgamation of lists already available to the government should be used to select jurors, like the American system, using public records such as the DVLA lists, and housing lists, so as to make the potential number of jurors as large and as representative as possible. Auld also recommended that changes be made to permit a judge to provide 'ethnic representation' if a case has a racial issue. To seek an especially composed jury for certain cases suggests that the ordinary random jury is not able to perform its task in the required way. Jury trial, for many years, has been called 'the cornerstone' of the British system of criminal justice. It is a respected mode of trial which as we have seen, has been around for centuries. The use of juries allows the British public a hand in the criminal justice system, which many of them may never otherwise have any experience of. This can be seen as a benefit, but it can also be called part of the downfall of trial by jury in that, putting twelve people with no training or experience in criminal justice matters into a jury box might be expecting too much of some people, as they are asked to leave

Some topics in this essay:
Samuel Chase, Convention Liberty, Court Act, Usually Jury, Lord Devlin, Professor Blackstone, Secrets Act, Runcimann Commission, Jury Work”, Racial Equity, criminal justice, criminal justice system, jury service, justice system, trial jury, human rights, previous convictions, crown court, potential jurors, contempt court, commission racial, human rights act, court act 1981, convention human rights, contempt court act,