Forum menu
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21516473
[i]On Tuesday the judge, Mr Justice Sweeney told the court some of the questions being asked by the jury demonstrated a "fundamental deficit in understanding" of the trial process and its role.
It had asked 10 questions about jurors' basic duties after about 14 hours of deliberations and lengthy advice from the judge about how to assess the evidence.
Huhne, whose political career is now over, could be sent to jail after admitting the offence
The questions included seeking a definition of reaching a verdict beyond reasonable doubt - something the judge had given them in writing.
In another question, the jury asked if one of them could come to a verdict based on reasons that were not presented in court or supported by the evidence. A third question asked about Ms Pryce's religious convictions, even though this was not a matter in the trial. [/i]
And,
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-21511904
Or is it just that now most UK citizens don't really understand our language?
definately linked with this,
I am however not stupid enough to give a personal opinion on this.
I suspect that in a case like this, lawyers on both sides are a cut above the average, and will have twisted the meanings and expectations of "reasonable doubt" in their arguments.
The religion and "other reasons" stuff is somewhat bizarre.
Are you suggesting that the jury are incapable of coming to a verdict because they are not white? Which seems like casual racism to me.
Perhaps you should also mention that it is a jury of 8 women and 4 men.
Which seems like casual racism to me.
Doesn't seem to be much casual about it...
perhaps the OP meant the langauge of the court, rather than spoken english. I for one would struggle with the erudite and eloquent barristers trying to tie me in knots with their prose
[i]Are you suggesting that the jury are incapable of coming to a verdict because they are not white? [/i]
No, I was suggesting it was because they weren't British - or at the very least British enough to actually understand their bloody job!
[i]Perhaps you should also mention that it is a jury of 8 women and 4 men. [/i]
Ah, maybe that's it then...
Suppose that raises another question; which is worse, being a racist or sexist 😉
No, I was suggesting it was because they weren't British
There are very few qualifying requirements to being on a jury, being British is one of them.
Really?
Resident in the UK for at least 5 years since age 13;
Hardly the same thing, surely?
You have to be on the parliamentary electoral register, foreigners are not allowed to vote in UK parliamentary elections and therefore not on the register. Except for Irish nationals - I'll give you that.
I think a basic IQ and comprehension test should be mandatory for jury service. Being an atheist should also surely be a requirement (because you don't want people in a jury that can't differentiate fact from fiction).
Would be nice if only people that actually wanted to be there were on jury service too.
I think if they videod some jury deliberations (perhaps for fake cases), the public would quickly realise what a flawed system it was.
So out of curiosity, what is leading you to believe that the jury "lack britishness"? No denying that you can get white, british, dunderheads.
You have to be on the parliamentary electoral register, foreigners are not allowed to vote in UK parliamentary elections and therefore not on the register. Except for Irish nationals - I'll give you that.
Sure about that?
According to lawmentor, the Jury Central Summoning Bureau make their selection from the electoral register. I can't find anything to suggest it's a legal requirement that you be a British, commonwealth or Irish citizen but it seems like it might be a practical requirement.
Anyone from these countries who is resident in the UK can register to vote.
European Union countriesAustria
Belgium
Bulgaria
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Estonia
Finland
France
Germany
Greece
Hungary
Ireland
ItalyLatvia
Lithuania
Luxemburg
Malta
Netherlands
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Sweden
United KingdomCommonwealth countries
Antigua and Barbuda
Australia
The Bahamas
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belize
Botswana
Brunei Darussalam
Cameroon
Canada
Cyprus*
Dominica
Fiji Islands**
The Gambia
Ghana
Grenada
Guyana
IndiaJamaica
Kenya
Kiribati
Lesotho
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Malta*
Mauritius
Mozambique
Namibia
Nauru
New Zealand
Nigeria
****stan
Papua New Guinea
Rwanda
St Kitts & Nevis
St LuciaSt Vincent & The Grenadines
Samoa
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Solomon Islands
South Africa
Sri Lanka
Swaziland
Tonga
Trinidad & Tobago
Tuvalu
Uganda
United Kingdom
United Republic of Tanzania
Vanuatu
Zambia
Zimbabwe**British Overseas Territories
Anguilla
Bermuda
British Antarctic Territory
British Indian Ocean Territory
British Virgin Islands
Cayman Islands
Falkland Islands
Gibraltar
Montserrat
Pitcairn IslandSt Helena and dependencies (Ascension Island and Tristan da Cunha)
South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands
Sovereign base areas on Cyprus
Turks and Caicos Islands
Big old area is the commonwealth - we used to own that 😀
Only British nationals can vote in parliamentary elections. And Irish.
Only British nationals can vote in parliamentary elections. And Irish.
And people from the massive list of Commonwealth countries I listed.
(If they are resident in the UK etc....)
edit:
what Neal said!
Nice edit
I had already said Irish half a dozen posts previously.
Sometimes Z-11 you really are like a small child.
And people from the massive list of Commonwealth countries I listed.
Fair enough, but not the EU countries which you also listed.
aha, I see what you're trying to do now Ernie - playing the man, not the ball!
Subject to the provisions of this Act, every person shall be qualified to serve as a juror in the Crown Court, the High Court and county courts and be liable accordingly to attend for jury service when summoned under this Act, if—
(a)he is for the time being registered as a parliamentary [u]or local government elector[/u] and is not less than eighteen nor more than [seventy] years of age;
Which would include the EU citizens.
I'll leave it there, you've dug your own hole.
nealglover - MemberAnd people from the massive list of Commonwealth countries I listed.
(If they are resident in the UK etc....)
More to it than that- residency doesn't qualify, you need to either have leave to remain in the UK, or to be exempt from that need.
Fair enough, but not the EU countries which you also listed.
Ah I see, That would be the reason why I didn't mention them then I suppose.
That would be the reason why I didn't mention them then I suppose.
I took you listing them as you mentioning them. Obviously you see things differently, but there's no need to explain.
but there's no need to explain
But I will enlighten you anyway.
The first list was a list of people who are eligible to register to Vote.
As it said above that list.
The second post (that only mentioned the commonwealth part of the list) was referring to people who are allowed to vote in a General election once registered to vote.
Hope that clears up your confusion.
Yes thanks, that explains everything.
[img] 
[/img]
So we've pretty much decided that these were average folk who live in London..., like I say to my son when he queries somebodys' strange actions:
[i]
"nearly half the population are below average intelligence"...[/i]
like I say to my son when he queries somebodys' strange actions:"nearly half the population are below average intelligence"...
He's going to grow up to be a nice person. Presumably as thick and stupid as his dad.
Duck pond - if they float, they's a witch.
Because witches are made of wood, wood floats.
Wood also burns, therefore burn the witch.
This system of justice has never been bettered.
Question 5 is pure comedy genius
5. Can a juror come to a verdict based on a reason that was not presented in court and has no facts or evidence to support it either from the prosecution or defence?
[i]He's going to grow up to be a nice person. Presumably as thick and stupid as his dad. [/i]
Ernie are you unable to understand a basic truth, for there to really be an average there needs to be +ve and -ve, and intelligence/common-sense are no different. And based on The Sun been the UK's best selling paper...
Yeah I understand what average means, although I had no idea that intelligence and commonsense were the same thing. And tell me more about the Sun newspaper ?
5. Can a juror come to a verdict based on a reason that was not presented in court and has no facts or evidence to support it either from the prosecution or defence?
I haven't read into the details of the case but isn't the above just a simple question needing a simple answer?
isn't the above just a simple question needing a simple answer?
No, anyone requiring an answer to that question isn't up to playing jury. Unless they're asking it to deliberately lengthen the process and so get an extra free lunch.
As discussed on the other thread, that question was almost certainly asked by somebody other than the one confused about whether to use the evidence presented in court or their own imagination to make a decision - in order to make a point to said person.