Evaluating the jury in the English legal system - Essay Example

?English Law – Analysis of the Jury System Introduction This paper attempts to comprehensively analyze the Jury present in the English legal system. It (paper) would examine the strengths and weaknesses of the jury, based on the current state of affairs. Also, the paper would go on to suggest the manner in which improvements can be brought about in this system (jury). Before proceeding further with the discussion on all the aspects mentioned in the previous paragraph, it would be of help in having a brief look at the jury, as it is seen in the English legal system. Jury Historically, the concept of jury has been there in the English legal system for nearly the past eight centuries. But it was only in the year 1670 that a jury having its distinct power and which is not dependent on the judge was formed. In the criminal cases, the jury comes to the decision whether or not the crime in question can be attributed to the defendant. Likewise, in the civil matters, the jury decides whether the claimant has come forward with proof strong enough to strengthen their case. Here, the jury also arrives at a collective decision about the eligibility of the claimant to receive compensation. (1) As per the English Law, a person can become a part of the jury, only if they satisfy some conditions. Firstly, the age of the person should not be less than eighteen and more than seventy. To become part of a jury, it is imperative that the electoral roll has name of the person, and it is also required that they have been a resident of the United Kingdom for a minimum of five years, right from the time when they were thirteen. Here, it needs to be noted that persons who are directly related to the judiciary or the department of justice cannot be included in a jury. People who have developed any mental ailments are not eligible to get included in the jury, too. (1) At this point, it needs to be specifically mentioned that all the above are only the most vital points pertaining to jury of the English legal system. It has to be understood that there are several other laws and regulations governing the avenue (jury). As is the case with most of the systems, even the jury has both strengths and weaknesses, and the paper would now endeavor to have a look at them (strengths & weaknesses). Strengths There are several advantages of the jury system of the English Law, and a brief glance at some of the major ones (strengths) would be very much appropriate. Whenever a person accused of a crime is in a position that, despite being innocent the related legal aspects are very much against them, they can take the help of jury. And it is a matter of common sense that there are countless legal cases where, the points enumerated in the law books cannot be of help to the defendant in proving their innocence. (2) Likewise, the jury system can be conveniently rated as being a safeguard to the common man of the country, as it prevents the government from adopting an autocratic approach. To put it in other words, the jury makes sure that the government cannot imprison people solely for furthering its political objectives. A person can be jailed only when they are guilty of committing a crime, as per the British Law. The jury goes a long way in making sure that the citizens of the land are not victimized by the corrupt acts of judges. (2) One of the major advantages of the jury as per the English Law is that, it enables common people of the Kingdom to participate in the process of delivering justice. As a result of that, it can be safely concluded that, the eventual judgment is nothing but the common verdict of people pertaining to varying backgrounds. It (judgment) can in no way be the decision of just one official of the judiciary, courtesy the presence of jury system. In addition, the juries go a long way in making sure that the verdict delivered by them is free of ambiguity. They just need to decide whether the accused in question is innocent or guilty. (3) As mentioned earlier, the members of a jury come from diverse social backgrounds. Owing to that, it is but obvious that the verdict given by them can be rated to be a reflection of the society’s stand on the issue in question. It can conveniently be opined that the judgment delivered by the jury is a fair one, as the presence of many members ensures that the verdict is in no way impacted by the distorted ideas of one individual. (3) Weaknesses At this juncture of the write-up, it needs to be candidly admitted that the jury system of the English Law is not without some striking disadvantages. It would now be worthwhile in having a succinct look at some of the major drawbacks of the jury, in the English Legal System. One of the major weaknesses of the jury system is attributable to the fact that, in a substantial chunk of cases, once the accused is acquitted; there is no scope for any retrial. Also, enquiry against the jury is not permitted after the judgment is delivered. This is so even when there is an allegation that the jury came out with an unfair decision, based on racial and other forms of discrimination. This subtly throws light on the fact that, unfortunately, there is no accountability for the jury. (4) It has also been observed that managing the jury system is rather a big burden on the state’s exchequer. Additionally, there is also a possibility of the defendants craftily manipulating the process followed by the jury. In several cases, it was seen that the jury went to the extent of wrongfully challenging the government, which has been elected by means of a democratic process. (4) It is rather disturbing to be noting that, there are quite a few cases where, the jury has come out with an unfair judgment. This can be partly attributed to the undue hastiness displayed by the jury members in winding up the process as soon as possible, so that they can resume their other activities. It has to be stated that, there are several instances where, the jury process has been manipulated by the ingenuity of the barristers. This is so much so that, the jury members chose to ignore the points suggested by the available evidence. (4) Owing to the jury system of English Law, there indeed is a risk that, the defendants are not allowed to be benefited by the aspect of “benefit of doubt”. And it is a matter of common sense that, when there is strong doubt about the involvement of the defendant in the crime, the verdict should be delivered in their (defendant) favor. It is also being observed that, several young people having inadequate experience in life are finding their way into juries, as members. This just goes to enhance the risk of coming out with wrong verdicts. (4) Also, it is an irrefutable fact that there is no dearth for the cases where, the jury process goes on for an abnormally long period. And this long duration provides the parties involved with a strong chance of manipulating things in their favor. Last but in way the least, it is not that easy to stringently disqualify erring jurors, and even if such actions are initiated against them, they can again get included in juries without too many hassles. This increases the possibility of the justice being denied. (4) More about the Jury System of English Law At this point, it would very much be relevant in having a look at more information on the English Jury system. As a matter of fact, this is more or less imperative in having a thorough understanding of the key issue that is being discussed in this paper. It would be rather interesting to note that, the English Jury system is empowered to even defy the law in question. To elaborate further, the jury may choose to acquit the accused, even when there are instructions from the judge to carry out the conviction. Generally, the jury challenges these instructions only when it is fully convinced that, in light of the facts pertinent to the case, the concerned law cannot be applied. Also, the jury has the power to even defy a law, if it feels that it (law) is not fair. (5) Probably, the biggest criticism that is leveled against the jury system is that, excessive importance is given to a group of twelve persons, even at the cost of ignoring the individual rights. To put it in other words, it is argued that unless the accused themselves have voluntarily given the rights to the jury, there is no way in which its (jury) rights can be considered as being greater than the ones related to them (accused). People going with this argument maintain that, just because a person committed a crime does not mean that they should be deprived of even their basic rights. This is in the sense that, the accused person’s fate should not be relying solely on the decision of a group, and this in fact is what the jury is all about. (5) Here, a vital point is worthy of special mention. People and groups championing for human rights have always been against the concept of jury. But it has to be admitted that they (people and groups) are not fully right in their stand against the jury, for the eventual outcome varies from one case to another. In a particular case, the jury upholds the individual rights and checks the autocratic approach of the government. Likewise, in another case, owing to a wrong verdict, it might be depriving people of the basic rights. As the patterns vary from case to case, it cannot be generalized that the functioning of a jury is very much against the rights of people. (5) There are some sections of the United Kingdom that forcefully maintain that the efficient functioning of the jury system was gravely impacted many decades back itself. This happened when everyone of the electoral roll was made eligible to be making use of this service (jury system), as and when needed. These people do admit the fact that the jury has been rendering excellent service to the Kingdom since a long time, and it is just that some reforms have to be made to it. While presenting their arguments, the opponents (of juries) say that, it is highly unreasonable that, a group comprising of twelve individuals with insufficient educational qualifications and expertise is rated to be more competent than the qualified judges. (6) Jury and the Internet Internet, undoubtedly, has revolutionized the World, in the sense that owing to it, vast information is now easily available. Despite all the benefits that this sophistication has enabled, simultaneously, it has to be conceded that Internet has its drawbacks, too. And the drawbacks related to the topic of this paper are those that deal with acquiring details in a swift manner and sharing it with the accused in such a way that the entire case gets distorted. In this connection, it would be highly apt in having a brief glance at few cases where, internet was used in a wrongful manner. (7) Recently, a member of a jury was imprisoned because she got in touch with the accused, on Facebook, and disclosed sensitive information of the jury to them (the accused). Also, she gathered details pertaining to one more accused of this very case. As a matter of fact, this juror happened to be the first one to have been brought to book, for fraudulent usage of a social networking portal. There is another case in which, the person accused of manslaughter managed to escape conviction, as the case happened to collapse. Here, a jury member took photographs of the place where the crime was committed, and subsequently, gathered information connected with the case, on the Worldwide Web. Subsequently, the juror revealed all the collected details to rest of the jury. He also went on to submit many highly perplexing questions of the case to the judge, along with a google map of the crime scene. Owing to such vast information that was giving scope for doubts, the judge just dismissed the whole case. (7) In one more case, which was related to cruelty against children, a juror gained access to fake information on the Internet pertaining to the defendant. The member revealed the obtained information to the other jurors, and the ensuing circumstances made sure that the case was dismissed. (7) Using several such cases as the basis, the groups and people opposing the jury system state emphatically that it (jury) has to be dispensed with. As it is, the opponents of the jury have been there since several decades. But now, the way in which Internet is being used by jurors to attain their questionable objectives just goes on to further strengthen the arguments of the above groups. There is no denying of the fact that, in cases similar to the ones discussed above, the very integrity of the judiciary is being seriously endangered, along with wasting away the money got from the taxpayer. (7) In light of all the contents that have been elaborated in this section, it is of paramount relevance that even the activities of the jurors on the Internet need to be meticulously scrutinized, at least as long as the trial is in progress. Otherwise, there is a strong chance that more and more cases like the ones mentioned above would become the order of the day where, the entire proceedings are grievously distorted. The fact that that leads to unfair judgments warrants no special mention. (7) Improvements to Juries and Alternatives Even the people vehemently opposing the way in which the jury functions are not in favor of abolishing the system (jury) altogether. The jury system has been in existence in the UK since several centuries, and it is nothing short of a cherished tradition, in the Kingdom. Hence, most of the arguments are only in the direction of reforming the system rather than eliminating it totally. Of late, several studies have been carried out for the purpose of bringing about a marked improvement in the functioning of the jury, in the United Kingdom. It would now very much be apt in taking a brief glimpse of the salient points highlighted by all those studies. It is being strongly recommended by experts in the realm of law & justice that, a noteworthy improvement can be made to the jury, when the same (jury) is divided into several groups of smaller size. It is seen that even when the process followed by the existing juries is considered, the jurors tend to get divided into groups, with each group having a different opinion. Hence, it can be stated that when the jury is officially divided into many groups, active participation by all the members would become possible. The chances of a wrongful verdict would then get minimized. (8) Another recommendation from diverse quarters is that the monetary compensation paid to the jurors should be enhanced, and the logic behind this is quite simple to understand. When people are paid a handsome sum they definitely tend to take the concerned job more seriously, and thus the possibility of any deviations is reduced. (8) One more highly pivotal suggestion is that, it needs to be ensured that adequate knowledge about the law and legalities is imparted to the jurors. It is a fact that, at least as of the current state of affairs, a significant chunk of jurors are devoid of even the basic knowledge of law and its intricacies. It is but obvious that when the jurors are fully knowledgeable about the diverse complexities of the law, there is every possibility that the resulting judgments are fair. (8) It is also being opined that, one of the best means of improving the jury is to make sure that instructions are given by the judge in a simple language that is easy to comprehend by the jurors. It is a fact that the jurors do face problems in understanding and interpreting directions that are given in highly complicated language where, too many complex terms are present. Currently, it is estimated that approximately two thirds of all the jurors in the UK fail to fully understand the instructions of judges. Another way in which the capability of the jurors can be assessed is to make them undergo an eligibility test, prior to start of proceedings of the case. This would ensure that the jury related to the case is indeed comprised of competent individuals, who are capable of arriving at the apt verdict. (9) There is a recommendation that warrants attention from all the people related to the sphere of law & justice. If the juries have to come out with the appropriate judgment, it is more or less imperative that the laws are rewritten in such a way that even laymen do not face any hassles in understanding them. The fact that, presently, all the laws are elaborated in an excessively intricate manner leaving scope for ambiguity cannot be denied. (9) The current trend in the UK is such that, the government is showing more interest in bringing out new laws, almost incessantly, rather than striving to properly implement the prevalent laws. From the viewpoint of the jury system, this can be rated to be a highly unfavorable scenario. When new laws keep coming out on a regular basis, the jurors are confronted with too many issues in understanding them. It is rather tough for juries to keep themselves abreast of all the laws, when new ones are being introduced so frequently. Because of all that, if the jury system has to continue in the UK, there should be a drastic change in the approach of government. It (government) has to be more focused on how to use the laws that are presently in vogue, rather than being concerned about bringing new ones (laws). (9) Jury and the smaller crimes Since the recent past, many sections are strongly arguing that changes have to be made to the jury system in such a way that, only people accused of bigger crimes have access to it (jury trial). This contention is not without a valid reason. It is being observed that when more number of smaller crimes lead to involvement of the jury; the same is turning out to be a major burden for the state’s exchequer. It is being strongly argued that people accused of carrying out smaller crimes such as thefts should not be provided the right of a jury trial. (10) As a matter of fact, the perturbing aspect is that, owing to too many petty cases using the jury trial, the bigger cases involving major crimes are forced to wait. This is highly inappropriate, for the long wait would subject the parties involved in the serious cases to intense mental anguish. Hence, priority has to be given to cases where the crimes in question are grave ones. (10) With regard to the contents mentioned in the immediately preceding paragraph, an extremely vital point has to be specifically mentioned. When the above-mentioned waiting period is too long for all the major cases, there is a strong chance that the evidence could be tampered with. And when such a thing does takes place, a fair judgment cannot be delivered in the big trials. The aggrieved parties are deprived of justice. (10) Presently, it is estimated that the waiting period for a jury trial, on an average, ranges from roughly one month to one year. And there are quite a few instances where, solely attributable to the abnormally long durations of wait, the victims are deciding to withdraw the cases. This indeed is a very serious matter where, remedial measures have to be initiated as soon as possible. (10) At this point, it won’t be out of place in mentioning about a famous statement “justice delayed is justice denied”. This statement is very much applicable to all the above pattern of cases, in which, the time span of waiting is too long. It has to be honestly admitted that, in most such cases, the chances of arriving at a fair judgment are significantly less. (10) Conclusion This paper can be concluded with the remarks that, in light of the contents elaborated in it (paper), it can be said that there is no need whatsoever to totally ban the jury system. No doubt, there are some flaws in the system. But committed endeavors to bring about improvements in the jury system, by removing the flaws, would be sufficient to make sure that jury would be in a better position to deliver justice. It is very much necessary that experts of the realm of law & justice get actively involved in making these improvements, for it is only then that the presence of a near-perfect jury system is possible. The topic of this paper is an exhaustive one, and it is just not possible to be covering all its aspects in a brief paper such as this one. Yet, a sincere attempt has been made to encompass the most important of all the points. Sources 1) “HISTORY OF THE JURY SYSTEM”, lawteacher.net/english-legal-system/resources/juries-1.php, Internet, Law Teacher, 2011. 2) “What are the advantages of a jury trial?”, answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090228001947AAAf5px, Internet, Yahoo Inc., 2011. 3) “Magistrates & Juries – LAS-2”, peterjepson.com/law/Mitchell-Dunne%20LAS-2.htm, Internet, Charlotte Mitchell – Dunne, ND. 4) “Sixth Form Law”, sixthformlaw.info/01_modules/mod1/1_5_lay_people/1_5_2_juries/12_adv_disadv_juries.htm, Internet, NP, ND. 5) “Trial By Jury: A Source of Freedom or a Bad Idea?”, lewrockwell.com/mcelroy/mcelroy10.html, Internet, LewRockwell.com, 2000. 6) “Jury system at fault”, timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/letters/article4718902.ece, Internet, Times Newspapers Ltd, September 2008. 7) “We can't let 12 good men and true be undone by the internet”, guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jun/19/jury-trial-joanne-fraill-justice, Internet, guardian.co.uk, June 2011. 8) “How to Improve The Jury System: New Studies and Suggestions”, zacharycloud.wordpress.com/2011/06/18/how-to-improve-the-jury-system-new-studies-and-suggestions/, Internet, wordpress.com, June 2011. 9) “Should the jury system be changed?”, newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?forumID=7514&start=900&edition=2&ttl=20110712100356#7143452$, Internet, BBC News, ND. 10) “Call to scrap jury trials for lesser offences”, independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/call-to-scrap-jury-trials-for-lesser-offences-2123791.html, Internet, Wesley Johnson, November 2010. Read More