Skip to main content

Post content has been hidden

To unblock this content, please click here

K
Beginner August 2004

Jury Service experiences... and High Court question

KTc, 21 November, 2008 at 16:12 Posted on Off Topic Posts 0 8

I'm starting jury service on Monday and wondered if anyone wanted to post their experiences of being on a jury? I've been told to take ample reading material as sitting around for ages is the norm.

Also, I'm intrigued to learn why some cases are heard at the High Court in London? What would be the reason for cases being held there?

8 replies

Latest activity by MartinJN, 4 May, 2023 at 09:52
  • cleo231
    Beginner May 2008
    cleo231 ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    No idea why some cases are heard in London, but have done jury service in Southwark Crown Court. Take a good book as you can be waiting around for long periods. I got called and sworn in on the first morning and it lasted for a week and a half. I have to say that the whole experience was very interesting and would have loved to have sat in on more cases, but after the first case they let us go. I know some people who didn't get sworn in on any cases so sat around for days and days - that is way it goes. Hope you enjoy jury service.

    • Reply
  • Ice Queen
    Beginner January 2007
    Ice Queen ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    My ex uncles case will be heard at the Old Bailey in London as apparently this is the norm for charges of murder and conspiracy to murder

    • Reply
  • M
    Beginner
    Mrs JMP ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Cases heard at the High Court (Civil) are of high value & high profile/importance. I've had a case heard here.

    Cases at the old bailey are criminal & would have been commited in or around London & high risk/profile cases from England.

    • Reply
  • Wuzzle
    Beginner
    Wuzzle ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    I was called up in July. I was called for a case on the first morning of my two weeks, which lasted for 3 days, a domestic violence case. After the first one I was called up again but the guy pleaded guilty just before we went in. So they sent us home after that.

    It was really interesting actually, although a good part of it involved sitting around so yes I would recommend to take some good reading material.

    • Reply
  • lobster
    Beginner
    lobster ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Another good point is jury selection is not like you see it on TV - that's only in America. I've know a lot of people be dissapoited that they didn't get to be quizzed by a lawyer before being selected!

    • Reply
  • Mr JK
    Beginner
    Mr JK ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Obviously I can't give too many concrete details, but I turned up on Monday morning, was selected very quickly indeed (just a roll-call of names, no lawyer quizzing), and spent the next six days on a single case - quite an interesting one, as there was no doubt about who did what to whom (loads of physical evidence and witness statements), but the severity of the sentence depended on the level of intent. Basically, we had three options, ranging from legitimate self-defence (i.e. acquittal) to GBH (i.e. ten years - which is what he got).

    Most of the trial involved hearing the same events recounted by different people, and lots of note-taking. And then in the jury room we spent four hours trying to create a convincingly evidence-backed picture of what happened, before we reached the "beyond a reasonable doubt" stage. I was very impressed with most of my fellow jurors - there were a couple who were clearly bored out of their skulls, but most took the job very seriously indeed (quite rightly, as it was clear that a substantial prison sentence might result from our verdict). Interestingly, we all agreed that the prosecuting counsel was a pompous arse while the defence counsel was REALLY good - but the evidence proved overwhelming in the end.

    One thing that the experience really rammed home, though, was that "beyond a reasonable doubt" does NOT mean "100% certain" - I have to say I was quite relieved when I discovered that the defendant had a long string of previous convictions for similar offences, as that made it that much more likely that we'd reached the right verdict.

    I was on call for two weeks (i.e. ten working days), but because I spent six days on a single case they couldn't find anything else for me - if I remember rightly, I had to be available until further notice, but by the Wednesday of week two they told me that I'd discharged my obligation and they wouldn't be needing me again.

    • Reply
  • Katamari
    Beginner August 2008
    Katamari ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    Take lots of reading material. I sat around for the first day whilst the defendants tried to plea bargain, then when we all got selected it would have been a trial that went on for more than 2 weeks, which would seriously have inconvenienced me with the bratski. We all got discharged the day after that as we were not needed. I couldn't return to work, so had an extra 2 weeks off!

    • Reply
  • J
    Beginner September 2023 Nevada
    Jacson ·
    • Report
    • Hide content

    What are some of the most common criminal charges that criminal lawyers defend against, such as DUI, assault, theft, and drug offenses, and what are the potential consequences and penalties associated with these charges?

    • Reply

You voted for . Add a comment 👇

×

Related articles

General groups

Hitched article topics