It is a common feature of American courtroom drama that a defence attorney moves to remove a juror that they do not like the look of. Many clients wonder whether the same type of challenge can take place in an English courtroom.
The Jury Pool
In some circumstances there can be a challenge to the entire jury pool. This can happen in cases where local emotion is running so high that it would not be appropriate to try the case at the usual crown court centre.
An example of this was the trial of Jon Venables and Robert Thompson. They stood trial for, and were later convicted of, murdering two-year old Jamie Bulger in Merseyside. Their hearing was held not in the usual place, Liverpool Crown Court, but Preston.
In other cases there may be challenges to jurors with a particular characteristic. In the Hillsborough trial that took place earlier in 2019 the 100 potential jurors were handed a questionnaire asking for any reasons why they cannot sit on the jury, including potential links to the disaster, victims, police or criminal justice agencies.
They were also asked whether they or any close family members or friends were fans of Liverpool, Everton, Sheffield Wednesday or Nottingham Forest football clubs.
It is quite usual in trials for potential jurors to be read a list of witnesses in the case. This is to try to ensure no juror with a personal connection is sitting.
There can be no challenge to the make-up of a jury. For example, you cannot challenge because it is all-male, or lacking in racial balance.
Challenging an individual juror
A challenge to an individual juror is referred to as a ‘challenge for cause’ (section 12 Juries Act 1974). Challenge can be made both by prosecution and defence. There is also a prosecution power to ‘stand by’ a juror, but this is not considered in this article.
A challenge can be on the basis that the person is not eligible for jury service or for some other reason. The right to challenge without cause was abolished some years ago.
A challenge should be made before the juror is sworn, although the court has permitted a small degree of latitude (R. v. Harrington, 64 Cr.App.R. 1, CA.)
In practice, a successful challenge for cause is very rare.
Should we be concerned about juror bias?
Many people make observations about jury composition; an example we hear regularly is that a female jury is more likely to acquit in a rape case.
In truth, we do not know whether this and other claims are valid or not. There has been little research into jury decision making.
In our view, minds should be focussed much more on first-class case preparation and advocacy rather than abstract notions of perceived juror bias, particularly when there is not a great deal that can be done about it anyway.
How we can assist
If you need specialist advice in relation to any criminal investigation or prosecution, from the initial investigation through to court proceedings, please get in touch. Call John Howey on 020 7388 1658 or email email@example.com. Let us help.Read More
Crown Court ‘Drug’ importation trial success
The JFH Crime team have successfully defended a Portuguese national accused of importing approximately £500,000 of Class A dugs into the country. Our client had travelled from Dubai and said that he believed that he was importing gold in order to avoid the duty that would otherwise have to be paid payable. He was arrested when he met another man to hand over the bag containing the drugs. The other man was arrested, eventually pleaded guilty and received a long prison sentence.
The prosecution relied on telephone evidence, but after looking at that very carefully, we were able to show that there was no link to the other defendant. The phone evidence showed that our client had no idea who he was supposed to be meeting and that he was receiving instructions from a third person, believed to be in Portugal. There was nothing in the phone evidence to suggest that our client knew that he was bringing drugs, rather than gold, into the country.
Our client was held in custody throughout the build up to the trial, and over the course of a number of visits to see him, we were able to take his detailed instructions. The fact that he was able to provide such a detailed account of his actions no doubt helped him at his trial. At the end of the trial, the client was found not guilty, and released from prison. He has now returned home.
The client was represented in the Crown Court by Ms Amanda Hamilton from 15 New Bridge Street Chambers, instructed by John Howey of JFH Crime.
If you have a case in the Crown Court and need representation, please contact us on firstname.lastname@example.org, or call us on 02073881658Read More