Crown Court Trial Notes

CC TRIAL

The jury

• who can serve

  • every person must attend or jury service when summoned if:

1. aged 18 - 70; AND

2. on the electoral roll; AND

3. ordinarily resident in UK for any period of at least 5 years since attaining age 13; AND

4. NOT ineligible due to mental disorder; AND

5. NOT disqualified due to pre-cons i.e. a person:

   1. permanent disqualification:

      • life sentence

      • dangerous offender sentence / IPP

      • sentenced to 5+ years' UK custodial sentence

   2. temporary disqualification

      • on bail at time called

      • UK custodial / suspended sentence in last 10 years (i.e. disqualified for 10 years)

      • community order in last 10 years (i.e. disqualified for 10 years)

   • excusal / deferral

     • no one can refuse jury service

     • BUT Jury Central Summoning Bureau (JCSB - administers jury system for CC) has discretion (on application of juror) to allow juror to:

1. be excused if

1. can show good reason (s9(2) Juries Act); OR

2. NOT capable of acting effectively as juror due to physical disability

2. seek deferral of summons (s9A1) e.g. holiday clash

   • regardless of whether already applied to JCSB, can also apply to court to be excused

   • potential bias

     • test = apparent bias: would a fair-minded and informed observer conclude that there was a real possibility of bias having regard to fact eligible and that any objection would be the subject of judicial decision? (Porter v Magill)

       • CPS employee in case prosecuted by CPS

       • serving police officer working in same area as police Ws in case

       • juror knows disputed W personally (i.e. W likely to give oral evidence)

       • juror is serving police officer AND knows W personally AND important conflict on police evidence

       • agreed W (even if police officer)

       • merely employed as prison officer in prison where D held (mere suspicion would know D's bad character)

       • CPS employee in case prosecuted by another pros authority

       • ? serving police officers generally:

1. fair minded observer conclude partiality of juror to W may have caused jury to accept evidence of that W; AND

2. would fair minded observer consider that this may have affected outcome of trial?

   • how is biased determined?

     • case-by-case basis

     • judge asks Qs to juror (in court / in writing)

• summoning for jury service

  • can be summoned to attend anywhere

  • BUT Lord Chancellor must have regard to convenience to jurors + desirability of selecting those who live within reasonable travelling service

  • LC simply picks from electoral roll duty to inform if ineligible / disqualified

  • panels of those summoned

    • LC preps lists of those summoned, in his discretion

• empanelling the jury

1. number of potential jurors come into courtroom

2. clerk explains to D 12 names read will = jury

3. clerk selects 12 jury cards (name + address) + reads out names

4. those 12 go into the jury box

5. clerk tells D he has right to challenge jurors before sworn

6. clerk reads each name, after which juror swears oath

7. judge warns jury that they:

1. should try case on evidence + nothing else

2. must not discuss case outside court

3. should NOT conduct own private research, especially re: the internet (special emphasis, set out penal consequences)

4. warn of need to bring to judge's attention immediately if have any concerns about fellow jurors

• challenging potential jurors

1. standby

   • procedure

     • as juror starts to take oath, pros says 'stand by'

     • judge explains juror cannot sit on that jury (but may be able to on another)

   • common reasons for standby

1. juror fails check

   • usually: PCN for pre-cons by pros

   • national security: thorough check by pros

   • if check positive, stand juror by

2. manifestly unsuitable to sit on particular jury + defence agrees e.g. can't read oath + case document heavy

   • who has power to stand a juror by?

     • only pros (NOT defence) + do NOT have to give reasons

     • judge (rare)

       • N.B. judge CANNOT use power to ensure racially balanced jury or otherwise interfere with random composition of jury

2. challenge for cause

   • use if suspect juror may be biased

   • challenge the polls (single juror) OR challenge the arraign (whole jury)

   • procedure

     • counsel says 'challenge' before juror takes oath

     • simple reason: counsel says in open court

     • complex reason: jury leave, counsel explains, juror may Q'd

   • determining bias

     • test: real possibility of bias Porter (see above)

     • no Q can be asked of juror unless challenging party has already established a prima facie case that person likely to be biased

   • adverse pre-trial publicity

     • juror should only be asked if read (+ if has, successfully challenged) in exceptional circumstances

     • NOT reason for stopping trial if possible to have fair trial

   • who has power to stand a juror by?

     • pros

     • defence

3. judge objects (discretion)

   • replacement of juror after successful challenge

     • replaced by member of jury in waiting

• discharge of jurors

  • discharge of individual jurors during trial

    • up to 3 jurors can be discharged due to evident necessity (matter for judge) e.g. illness, juror has behaved contrary to oath

    • minimum number on jury = 9

    • if more than 3 jurors discharged trial must be abandoned in favour of fresh trial

  • discharge of entire jury

    • mechanism of discharge

      • judge has discretionary power

      • either side can invite making of order BUT judge can make even if both sides submit that it should NOT be made

      • global test = do the interests of justice require the jury to be discharged - are there real grounds for doubting ability of jury to bring objective judgment to bear?

    • effect of discharge

      • D NOT acquitted - can be retried

    • reasons for discharge

1. jury hears evidence that is inadmissible AND prejudicial to D

   • test = test for bias: would OR could continuing trial - by reason of admission of unfairly prejudicial material - result in an unfair conviction?

   • NOT automatic - discretion of trial judge

   • judge may simply direct jury to ignore inadmissible evidence

2. jury CANNOT agree on a verdict

3. individual juror discharged AND risk that juror contaminated rest of jury:

   1. e.g. revealing inadmissible evidence

   2. if juror has specialist knowledge of...

Buy the full version of these notes or essay plans and more in our BPTC Criminal Litigation Notes.