Jury Service

Is it the same procedure in every country, ie are people selected at random by computer from the electoral register and it's their public duty to serve?

Have you ever been called?

Yes, but I pleaded business commitments.

Didn't you want to do it?

Not every country has jury trials!

Jury trial is embedded in those countries with a strong tradition of the common law, which largely amounts to those influenced one way or another by English tradition.

Outside of that, jury trial is often seen both as the exception, and also as a slightly peculiar way of going about things.

I got called up to a murder case about a decade ago...

He'd killed his wife...I tried to get him off, but the evidence was too compelling.

Moral of the story: don't say nuthing to the cops.

Shoeshine wrote:Not every country has jury trials!

Jury trial is embedded in those countries with a strong tradition of the common law, which largely amounts to those influenced one way or another by English tradition.

Outside of that, jury trial is often seen both as the exception, and also as a slightly peculiar way of going about things.

I guess I didn't phrase the question very well.
I really meant the countries that are represented on this forum.

Demelza wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:Not every country has jury trials!

Jury trial is embedded in those countries with a strong tradition of the common law, which largely amounts to those influenced one way or another by English tradition.

Outside of that, jury trial is often seen both as the exception, and also as a slightly peculiar way of going about things.

I guess I didn't phrase the question very well.
I really meant the countries that are represented on this forum.

I don't think India has them.

So basically only civilised countries have juries?

Demelza wrote:Didn't you want to do it?

Not really . . . bit if a waste of time unless it's the OJ Simpson case or something similarly farked up.

So basically only civilised countries have juries?


Well, that's what I was gonna say!
What system do they have in India then?

have always got out of it...work commitments

horace wrote:have always got out of it...work commitments

How many times have you been called???

three or four times...btw a mate of mine was called up and sat on a case (white collar crime) that went for over 9 months

horace wrote:have always got out of it...work commitments

twit, you were knocked back because you cannot be jury and defendant at the same time

horace wrote:three or four times...btw a mate of mine was called up and sat on a case (white collar crime) that went for over 9 months

Reading about it and it says, "For most people, jury service is interesting and something they will do only once or twice in their lifetime."

I hope you do the lottery!

Demelza wrote:

horace wrote:three or four times...btw a mate of mine was called up and sat on a case (white collar crime) that went for over 9 months

Reading about it and it says, "For most people, jury service is interesting and something they will do only once or twice in their lifetime."

I hope you do the lottery!

In Aus, getting out of jury duty doesn't count as doing it - you just get put back into the pool. In fact if you get out of it you are more likely to be called back up then someone who has never been called up.

That would make sence.

I quite fancy the idea.

I was called up, but then the case got postponed.

I cannot remember how the remuneration works. But I assume they compensated you fully for absence from work.

I suppose if you hate your job, having it easy at Jury service for four weeks isn't a bad thing!

Invader Zim wrote:So basically only civilised countries have juries?

If you consider the US civilised that is.

Demelza wrote:

horace wrote:three or four times...btw a mate of mine was called up and sat on a case (white collar crime) that went for over 9 months

Reading about it and it says, "For most people, jury service is interesting and something they will do only once or twice in their lifetime."

I hope you do the lottery!

I think that's once or twice in a normal lifetime.

If I was innocent I'd rather have a judge decide my fate.

JGK wrote:If I was innocent I'd rather have a judge decide my fate.

Yep . . .

tac wrote:

JGK wrote:If I was innocent I'd rather have a judge decide my fate.

Yep . . .

Hmm. Can't provide a link or anything, but I was under the impression that juries were more likely to acquit than judges - in the UK anyway.

Shoeshine wrote:

tac wrote:

JGK wrote:If I was innocent I'd rather have a judge decide my fate.

Yep . . .

Hmm. Can't provide a link or anything, but I was under the impression that juries were more likely to acquit than judges - in the UK anyway.

I should have added that if I was guilty then I would prefer a jury trial.

Both my comments suggest that jury trials are flawed.

JGK wrote:

Shoeshine wrote:

tac wrote:

JGK wrote:If I was innocent I'd rather have a judge decide my fate.

Yep . . .

Hmm. Can't provide a link or anything, but I was under the impression that juries were more likely to acquit than judges - in the UK anyway.

I should have added that if I was guilty then I would prefer a jury trial.

Both my comments suggest that jury trials are flawed.

All judicial systems are flawed, because they are run by flawed humans.

The strength of the jury system is that it re-inforces the innocent until proven guilty concept. It is also a bulwark against state tyranny, because a jury has the explicit right (oddly, judges don't tell them this) to acquit if they regard the law or the prosecution as unfair.

Judges are more likely to convict if they think the defendant is probably guilty. "Probably" ain't good enough, as we see from numerous miscarriages of justice.