This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/feb/20/vicky-pryce-jury-did-its-duty
The article has changed 3 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Actually, the Vicky Pryce jury did its duty admirably | Actually, the Vicky Pryce jury did its duty admirably |
| (7 months later) | |
| How we laughed. Those questions that came in from the jury in the Vicky Pryce trial: could religion have played a part? Is it possible to speculate on the defendant's state of mind? What does "reasonable doubt" mean? In that electronic jury room where few if any legal niceties are observed – I am referring to Twitter – the hapless Southwark 12 were immediately condemned to Death by Ridicule. How stupid they must have been! Why were they even allowed to serve in the first place? | How we laughed. Those questions that came in from the jury in the Vicky Pryce trial: could religion have played a part? Is it possible to speculate on the defendant's state of mind? What does "reasonable doubt" mean? In that electronic jury room where few if any legal niceties are observed – I am referring to Twitter – the hapless Southwark 12 were immediately condemned to Death by Ridicule. How stupid they must have been! Why were they even allowed to serve in the first place? |
| As luck would have it, I had only a couple of hours earlier finished eight days of jury service at Kingston crown court in south-west London. My head was still full of legal language and process. I was still coming to terms with all that I had seen and heard over the previous week and a half. | As luck would have it, I had only a couple of hours earlier finished eight days of jury service at Kingston crown court in south-west London. My head was still full of legal language and process. I was still coming to terms with all that I had seen and heard over the previous week and a half. |
| If you haven't done jury service you haven't lived. Outside of family life, it's one of the most important things you could ever do. The structure, order and even-handedness of the trial system are remarkable. If you were ever sent for trial you should count yourself lucky to have it heard here, and before a jury. | If you haven't done jury service you haven't lived. Outside of family life, it's one of the most important things you could ever do. The structure, order and even-handedness of the trial system are remarkable. If you were ever sent for trial you should count yourself lucky to have it heard here, and before a jury. |
| Evidence, it was made plain to us, was what mattered, and only the evidence that was presented to the court. Judges are there to guide on questions of law. But the jury is "the judge of the facts". In my limited but freshly minted experience, jurors take their responsibilities very seriously. They pay attention. They wrestle with the facts. They work as a team. They ask good questions, in good faith, in an attempt to get to the truth. In turn, I and my fellow jurors were looked after very well by the court staff. We were treated with courtesy and respect, and thanked sincerely for our efforts. | Evidence, it was made plain to us, was what mattered, and only the evidence that was presented to the court. Judges are there to guide on questions of law. But the jury is "the judge of the facts". In my limited but freshly minted experience, jurors take their responsibilities very seriously. They pay attention. They wrestle with the facts. They work as a team. They ask good questions, in good faith, in an attempt to get to the truth. In turn, I and my fellow jurors were looked after very well by the court staff. We were treated with courtesy and respect, and thanked sincerely for our efforts. |
| Something important happens when the usher opens the door to the anteroom where you wait, and declares: "Jury in court." It means that evidence can be heard, and that the examination and cross-examination of witnesses can take place. Without the "jury in court", in other words, a fair trial cannot proceed. It is meaningless until the jury is in its place. | Something important happens when the usher opens the door to the anteroom where you wait, and declares: "Jury in court." It means that evidence can be heard, and that the examination and cross-examination of witnesses can take place. Without the "jury in court", in other words, a fair trial cannot proceed. It is meaningless until the jury is in its place. |
| While one or two of the Southwark jury's questions may have amused people, we cannot know everything that prompted them, and most of them seemed to me to be perfectly sensible. I have not heard all the evidence in this case, and neither have you. People not in court cannot really know or understand the detail. | While one or two of the Southwark jury's questions may have amused people, we cannot know everything that prompted them, and most of them seemed to me to be perfectly sensible. I have not heard all the evidence in this case, and neither have you. People not in court cannot really know or understand the detail. |
| And far from it being ridiculous to ask what a "reasonable doubt" is, this in fact goes to the heart of the "standard of proof" required to have a safe conviction. Nowadays juries in criminal trials are told they have to be "sure" the prosecution has proven the defendant's guilt. That word "sure" is used precisely to avoid any understandable confusion over what a reasonable doubt might be. | And far from it being ridiculous to ask what a "reasonable doubt" is, this in fact goes to the heart of the "standard of proof" required to have a safe conviction. Nowadays juries in criminal trials are told they have to be "sure" the prosecution has proven the defendant's guilt. That word "sure" is used precisely to avoid any understandable confusion over what a reasonable doubt might be. |
| "What is truth?" Pilate asked nearly 2,000 years ago. It's not clear that anyone has come up with a really good answer to that one yet. That is one of the reasons why it is hard work being on a jury. It takes time. Discussions have to be handled with care. Prosecution and defence argue their case with fluency and skill. The judge sums up the evidence and the arguments. The jury is asked to weigh up conflicting details. While there must be no speculation about these details, "common sense inferences" may be drawn. You should try it sometime. It's no laughing matter. | "What is truth?" Pilate asked nearly 2,000 years ago. It's not clear that anyone has come up with a really good answer to that one yet. That is one of the reasons why it is hard work being on a jury. It takes time. Discussions have to be handled with care. Prosecution and defence argue their case with fluency and skill. The judge sums up the evidence and the arguments. The jury is asked to weigh up conflicting details. While there must be no speculation about these details, "common sense inferences" may be drawn. You should try it sometime. It's no laughing matter. |
| Mr Justice Sweeney concluded his guidance to the Southwark jury with these words: "If, after further consideration, you find yourselves in a position where you are simply not able to agree, then you must of course have the courage to say so." That is what they did, and in so doing they performed their civic duty admirably. | Mr Justice Sweeney concluded his guidance to the Southwark jury with these words: "If, after further consideration, you find yourselves in a position where you are simply not able to agree, then you must of course have the courage to say so." That is what they did, and in so doing they performed their civic duty admirably. |
| • For legal reasons, this article will not be open to comments | • For legal reasons, this article will not be open to comments |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. |