“And clodhopper is obviously a troll. Or Jeremy Corbyn.”

Why the ad hominem insults? Wasn’t that exactly what you accused another forum member of only yesterday? Somewhat hypocritical of you, non?

To answer accusations of ‘trolling’: I asked a question as to whether we should put a price on justice, to which people responded with their opinions and views. I questioned why should greater society bear the burden of having to recompense individual loss, to which some people responded with their views based on a perception of possible financial loss they might suffer. A perception seemingly based on a mythical notion that someone could face financial ruin as a result of doing their social duty in participating in our justice system. A perception which appears to be somewhat unfounded, because as yet, nobody has presented any facts which support this view. I think it would be very helpful, in the context of this discussion, to see how long the average court case involving a jury lasts, and how many cases proceed beyond the 10 minimum days service. I think such facts would give us a clearer picture as to the potential for individual financial loss.

I accept that my opinions might not match yours. Such is life. But to accuse me of ‘trolling’, or to suggest I am making ‘outrageous statements’, not to mention calling my personal income/circumstances into question (as if that had any bearing on my views), just shows poor manners and debating skills. By all means engage with the discussion (and I think it is a very interesting one), but please keep your personal opinions about me to yourself. Thanks.

I think it would be good for us all to remember what this particular case is all about, and to take a moment to think of the suffering of those who died in the Hillsborough disaster, and that of their families and loved ones, and to put aside our personal opinions and save this discussion for perhaps another time, out of respect.

Should get rid of juries all together anyway.

A pool of trained assessors. Some technical, chosen based on case particulars, with advisors on points of law.
I get the point, and it has some pluses [ I have served on a jury and some of my peers were thick morons who did not understand the law – or care] but I really dont want to be tried in a court and judged by the agents of the state. #tinfoilhat

You’re quite right. I wouldn’t want anyone to accuse me if being Jeremy Corbyn either. I retract any ad hominem.

But your position on the potential financial impact of a long running court case on anyone with expectations of an income greater than 27k is just unjustifiable.

You are advocating state sanctioned slavery: an obligation to provide labour against their will, under threat of imprisonment! The individual has done nothing wrong but you welcome their financial penalty?

No one’s says that there’s no inclination to chip in, but 1-2 yrs of “duty” is conscription. Would you favour that too?

To answer accusations of ‘trolling’: I asked a question as to whether we should put a price on justice, to which people responded with their opinions and views. I questioned why should greater society bear the burden of having to recompense individual loss, to which some people responded with their views based on a perception of possible financial loss they might suffer. A perception seemingly based on a mythical notion that someone could face financial ruin as a result of doing their social duty in participating in our justice system. A perception which appears to be somewhat unfounded, because as yet, nobody has presented any facts which support this view. I think it would be very helpful, in the context of this discussion, to see how long the average court case involving a jury lasts, and how many cases proceed beyond the 10 minimum days service. I think such facts would give us a clearer picture as to the potential for individual financial loss.

I think the ‘fact’ you’re looking for will be hard to find, bu that doesn’t make it untrue. It just means there isn’t a big database of every juror, potential juror, and their earnings (thank god).

Plenty of peoples livelyhoods depend on their business and often businesses rely on work generating more work, so taking a long break doesn’t just hit you in the pocket for the length of the trial, but for a long time afterwards whilst you build up the contacts and long term contracts again. Ditto anyone who is required to do a certain amount of CPD training. And what if the person in question is the MD of a company, should all his/her employees suffer also if the company ends up being wound up?

Ultimately this creates an unfair system because those people simply state that they cannot do jury service as their jobs are too important to them/others. Which means the jury will tend to be made up of lower incomes. I’ll be accused of sexism, but 7 women on the jury of a 2 year inquest does back that up as statistically women earn less and are far more likely to be housewives/stay-at-home-mums/etc.

I questioned why should greater society bear the burden of having to recompense individual loss, to which some people responded with their views based on a perception of possible financial loss they might suffer.

Perception? The maximum allowance you claim for jury service equates to about £35,000 gross salary.

I would struggle to pay my mortgage and bills.

state sanctioned

And you really don’t want any of that nonsense.

Too bloody right comrade

but 7 women on the jury

Only 6 now, one has had to leave on medical grounds.

The length of the whole thing is ridiculous, it really shouldn’t take 2 years.

Some of us had the foresight to get ourselves barred from doing jury service 🙂

I think it would be good for us all to remember what this particular case is all about, and to take a moment to think of the suffering of those who died in the Hillsborough disaster, and that of their families and loved ones, and to put aside our personal opinions and save this discussion for perhaps another time, out of respect.

Completely irrelevant IMO to the argument about whether Jurors should be properly compensated for their service.

You’re just letting emotion cloud your judgement.