Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Misc] Jury Service
- Thread starter Easy 10
- Start date
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Worthing exile
New member
- May 12, 2009
- 1,219
Easy 10
Brain dead MUG SHEEP
- Thread starter
- #124
Normal casual attire. I went smart-casual the first day, but most people were in jeans etc. Shorts are probably not appropriate, but don't feel you have to go in overly smart (unless you particularly fancy going all Henry Fonda on it). It was bloody freezing most of the time when I did mine, so I was in jeans and jumpers.
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Got the dreaded call.
How do I avoid being foreperson? Wear shorts and flip-flops I guess.
How do I avoid being foreperson? Wear shorts and flip-flops I guess.
See your post #122
Is it PotG?
Thrifty non-licker
Blimey, forgot about that. Looks like I need to order some gear then.See your post #122
Don't worry, there's bound to be some gobby know-it-all that will THRUST themselves forward for the role
We got lucky with a nice bloke, a vicar from Worthing.
schmunk
"Members"
You choose between yourselves. In my recent Jury Service, it was the juror already in chair 1 (i.e. called first in the random pick of jurors) who just did it - it's hardly a huge responsibility.
I did it for ours
Biscuit Barrel
Well-known member
Hmmm....depends on the case I guess, I certainly felt the weight of it. You can end up having to moderate some quite feisty arguments and entrenched positions in the jury room, you need to try to bring order the thinking/approach to some extent, be on top of everything that was said/presented in court (people forget things) and the worst bit for me was delivering the actual verdict - realising you're (in our case) potentially condemning someone to several years behind bars.
I did it for ours
We got two week long trials. I say "we" because randomly from a pool of 50 in the room, 11 of the 12 from the first trial, formed part of the second jury.
An eclectic mix of Brighton/Sussex characters ... two 'hang em types' mind made up on seeing the defendants (they didn't brow-beat any of us), some touchy-feely types and assorted others.
schmunk
"Members"
Fair point - I was on two relatively lightweight cases which both delivered Not Guilty verdicts due to lack of evidence (in fact on one count we were instructed by the Judge to do so).
Sure the selection method means most juries are such a mix, the two I was on were the same (one 8 days which was fairly traumatic , one a day and a half which was cut and dried as soon as we saw CCTV evidence)
In the first case the first 2 days were spent trying to convince one woman juror that because the defendant was 'looking at her funny' it didn't mean he was necessarily guilty and that wasn't a sound basis for a guilty verdict without needing to hear the rest of the case.
schmunk
"Members"
LamieRobertson
Not awoke
I really liked how ours worked.
I had taken notes of the judges legal directions. for example a deliberate double negative regarding sexual assaults. Few bothered, they came in handy in the Jury Room.
We gently went through what we knew and the law, to the waverers. The two 'hang-ems' tried to bully an older lady, I got the impression because they wanted to get home
. We (the chairman and two talkative others .... me) overrode that and steered her, but making it plain she had as much time as it took. We also worked out that a witness for the victim of a sexual assault had exaggerated to get the defendant done on a higher charge.On the second trial, two thugs in your neck of the woods, got thrills from knocking innocents unconscious when heading home from the town centre. We found out post verdict that one was already in HMP Lewes for giving brain damage (separate trial) to an overseas visitors in Burgess Hill.
There was no 'guilt' from us when they got a further 6 years.
That's MISTER Gobby Know It All to youHas GB been called up?
Just kidding…honest!
