What are the advantages and disadvantages of the current jury system in the UK - Essay Example

Download file to see previous pages D submitted copies of these documents to an MP from the opposition camp so that the issue could be raised in parliament. D was charged in accordance with the Official Secrets Act. Despite the clear knowledge that D’s actions amounted to an offense, he was acquitted by the jury1. The case above presents convincing evidence that the jury system acts as a counter balance to politically motivated and other improper prosecutions. Although they do not reveal their reasons for acquitting or convicting, juries provide certainty of their actions and this increases public confidence. Juries can also act on their conscience in addition to relying on evidence. This has the advantage of delivering justice even where confident witnesses present biased evidence.
Despite these advantages, the jury system as applied in the UK has several disadvantages. First, the jury system increases the costs incurred by courts. The group of jurors handling the case must be paid as well as the pool of jurors from which the jury has been selected. In addition, other court personnel are employed for the purposes of ministering to the jury during all stages of the case. Furthermore, the making of a verdict by one judge alone costs about £1,000 per day while a jury’s verdict costs about £7,400 per day, which is significantly more expensive.
There is evidence of perverse verdicts in the UK jury system. This is where juries make decisions that are outright against the law. One case in point in relation to this is R v Owen. In this case, it was established that D fired a sawn off a gun at T because T had killed his son through careless driving. T had been sentenced to serve a term of 12 months. D felt this was not enough, the reason for his action. D was tried for intentional malicious wounding and attempted murder. However, he was acquitted by Maidstone ...Download file to see next pagesRead More