Lecture 9 - JJMA contd.

• Who was the applicant in the case of Sander v United Kingdom?

  An Asian man
• What was the concern raised by a juror during the trial in Sander v United Kingdom?

  Racial comments and jokes made by fellow jurors
• What action did the judge take after hearing representations from counsel regarding the juror's concerns?

  The juror was separated from the rest while the judge heard representations
• What did all jurors do in response to the allegations of racial bias?

  They signed a letter refuting any possibility of racial bias
• Why did the judge conclude there was no real risk of prejudice in Sander v United Kingdom?

  Because the allegations were not investigated
• What was the outcome of the trial for the applicant and co-defendant in Sander v United Kingdom?

  The applicant was convicted, and the co-defendant was acquitted
• What article did the applicant claim was breached in the appeal to the ECHR?

  Article 6(1)
• What did the ECHR hold regarding the appearance of bias in Sander v United Kingdom?

  Jurors must appear free of bias to an impartial observer
• What did the judge's admonition to try the case on the facts alone imply in Sander v United Kingdom?

  It would not change racist views overnight
• Why was the acquittal of one Asian defendant considered irrelevant in Sander v United Kingdom?

  Because the evidence against him was much weaker
• Who criticized the ECHR in Sander v United Kingdom?

  Prof Zander
• What was the concern raised by the jury foreman in AG v Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd (2009)?

  He was concerned about the guilty verdict in a high-profile criminal case
• What was the outcome for both the juror and The Times in AG v Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd (2009)?

  Both were fined for contempt
• What did The Times argue in their defense in AG v Seckerson and Times Newspapers Ltd (2009)?

  They argued freedom of expression under Article 10
• What concern did a juror express in R v Mirza (2004)?

  That one of the other jurors was racist
• What did the House of Lords hold regarding jury room investigations in R v Mirza (2004)?

  They cannot investigate what occurred in the jury room
• What should trial judges do according to the practice direction in R v Mirza (2004)?

  Make inquiries before the verdict is reached
• What was the outcome for the juror in Attorney General v Scotcher (2005)?

  Successfully prosecuted under s.8 Contempt of Court Act 1981
• What was the juror's argument in Attorney General v Scotcher (2005)?

  That there had been a miscarriage of justice
• What makes researching jury behavior difficult?

  The secrecy of jury deliberations
• What did the 2005 government consultation reveal about public opinion on jury research?

  75% of respondents opposed allowing researchers access
• What does the Juries Act 1974 state about jury verdicts?

  Juries should ideally reach a unanimous verdict
• What is the minimum time a judge can wait before accepting a majority verdict?

  No less than two hours
• What percentage of jury cases result in a hung jury according to 2010 research?

  0.6%
• What do majority verdicts help guard against?

  Jury "nobbling" and individuals with extreme views
• What did Freeman (1981) argue about majority verdicts?

  They dilute the standard of proof
• What are the strengths of the jury system?

  • Public participation
  • Involves citizens in justice administration
  • Verdict reflects societal values
  • Meets constitutional requirement of being judged by peers
  • Many jurors find the experience impressive
  • Certainty in verdicts (guilty or not guilty)
  • Ability to judge according to conscience
• What was the defense used by the defendants in R v Kronlid (1996)?

  Committing a crime to prevent a worse crime
• What was the jury's verdict in R v Kronlid (1996)?

  All three defendants were found not guilty
• What was the charge against the defendant in R v Ponting (1985)?

  Breaching the Official Secrets Act
• What defense did Ponting claim in R v Ponting (1985)?

  Acting in the public interest
• What did the jury do in R v Ponting (1985) despite the trial judge's direction?

  The jury fully acquitted Ponting
• What was the outcome for Mr. Owen in R v Owen (1991)?

  He was acquitted by the jury
• What is a criticism of the jury system according to Lord Denning?

  Selection is too wide, leading to incompetent jurors
• What did Thomas (2010) conclude about jurors' understanding of legal questions?

  Only 31% understood legal questions without written instructions
• What are the issues related to perverse verdicts in jury trials?

  • Juries are more likely to acquit than magistrates
  • Confusion may lead to reasonable doubt
  • Some acquittals defy evidence
  • Juries generally work methodically and rationally
  • Jury trials can be arbitrary and unpredictable
• What was the outcome of Grobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd (2001)?

  The jury awarded £85,000 in damages for libel
• What was the basis for the Court of Appeal overturning the jury's verdict in Grobbelaar v News Group Newspapers Ltd (2001)?

  It was considered a "perverse verdict"
• What major issue did jury nobbling present during trials in Northern Ireland?

  It was a significant concern during the 80s and 90s
• What does s.54 of the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 allow for?

  An acquittal to be overturned and a retrial ordered