It is also regarded as a means to maintain a democratic society and so it is still operating in English legal system.
For further understanding of the English jury system, the history shall be examined since legal history enables us to investigate the origins and evolution of legal doctrines, to explore the intent or understanding behind particular statutes or a legal system. It is well established that William the Conqueror brought to England from Normandy a system of having witnesses who knew about a matter to tell a court of law what they knew (to "swear" under oath)4. In 1166 King Henry II made a major step by beginning to develop the idea of a more evidentiary form of settling disputes by the issuing of the Assize of Clarendon (an act of the king). This Assize was to replace the earlier case settlement method "trial by battle" (where the parties duelled to determine successful party) or "trial by ordeal" where an accused person would have to undergo a rather gruesome and painful task on the premise that, if they completed without injuries, or their injuries healed quickly, then they would be treated as innocent in any kind of charge lay against them.5 This was based on the principle of divine intervention and the belief that divine forces would not allow an innocent person to be harmed. .
In the twelfth century England, when the Assize was first introduced, unlike the modern-day jury, the jury was just a tool for the king; the earliest recorded juries were employed to be as mere recognitors (juror impanelled on an assize to hold a recognition in England in the period following the Norman Conquest)6, providing local knowledge, acting as witnesses and gathering information, rather than making decisions like it is now. In 1215 the concept of an accused person's right to be, "tried by their peers," was further formalised in Magna Carta7.