Criminal justice (Scotland) : improving the delivery of justice in Scotland: juries and verdicts [consultation paper] PDF
Preview Criminal justice (Scotland) : improving the delivery of justice in Scotland: juries and verdicts [consultation paper]
THE SCOTTISH OFFICE Improving JURIES the Delivery AND of Justice VERDICTS Scotland in F Ofto C°Ll1^94 cr sefehenss only >0ft TOB0K*KimKO?BE fg®na®sjfe®imtJOiaet PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit CONTENTS Chapter 1 Introduction 5 2 Juryservice 7 3 Theselectionofjuries 8 4 Juiycomprehension 20 5 Sizeofjuries 22 6 Simplemajorityverdict 24 7 The3verdictsystem 26 8 Whatnotprovenmeans 29 9 Misconceptionsabouttirenotprovenverdict 3.1 10 Thecaseforthenotprovenverdict 33 11 Thecaseagainstthenotprovenverdict 35 12 Twoverdicts:guiltyandnotguiltyorprovenandnotproven 38 13 Summaryofproposalsonwhichviewsaresought 39 Annexes A Theprocessofjuryselection 41 B Eligibilityforjuryservice 42 C Bibliographyandtableofappealcases 44 Appendix1 ResearchstudyintotheselectionofjurorsinScottish courts 45 3 PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1. Thispaperseeksviewsonproposalstoimprovetheoperationofthesystemofjurytrials inScotland,andontheargumentsforandagainstretentionofthenotprovenverdict andtheintroductionofatwoverdictsystem. 1.2. ThisisthethirdconsultationpaperintheGovernment’scurrentreviewofthecriminal justicesystem.Thefirstpaper,publishedinJune1993,examinedtheissueoftheveiy smallproportionoftrialswhichgoaheadonthedatefixed,andconsideredtheimpli- cationsintermsofthewasteofwitnesstime,aswellasthatofprosecutorsandthecourts themselves. The secondconsultationpaper, oncriminallegalaid,waspublishedin November1993andnotedthat,despitethegrowingcostofcriminallegalaid,there waswidespreadconcernthatitmaynotbeproperlytargetedonthemostappropriate cases.Itsetoutproposalsforthecosteffectiveprovisionoflegalaidincriminalcases, takingintoaccounttheGovernment’soverallresponsibilityfortheefficientoperation ofthecriminaljusticesystemandforthevalueformoneytobeachievedonbehalfof thetaxpayer.Afourthconsultationpaper,onsentencingandappeals,willbepublished soon. 1.3. Runningthroughthisreviewexerciseisaunifyingtheme.TheGovernmentattachesa highprioritytomaintainingthequalityofoursystemofjusticeandrecognisesthat,to achievethis,itisessential,thatthesystemmusthavethesupportofthepublicatlargo. It followsthatthesystem mustacknowledgeits dependenceupon thepublic,take accountoftheirneedsandarrangeitsbusinesssoastominimisetheinconvenienceto thosewhocomeintocontactwiththesystem,includingthosecitedforjuryservice,It isestimatedthatof72,000personswhoeachyearattendcourtorstandbytoattendfor juryservice,only20,000serveonajury,whiletheremaining52,000arenotintheend needed.Thispaperaccordinglyexamineswaysinwhichthejurysystemmightbemod- ifiedtokeepinconveniencetopotentialandactualjurorstoaminimumwhilemain- tainingthequalityofoursystemofjustice. 1.4. TheJusticeCharterforScotlandpromisedimprovementsintheserviceprovidedto jurors.TheScottishCourtsAdministrationisissuingnewinformationbookletsforjurors toexplainwhytheyhavebeencalledforjuryservice,whatwillbeexpectedofthemif 5 PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit JuriesandVerdicts theyarechosentoserveandwhatwillhappenincourt.Aprogrammeofimprovements tocourtbuildingsisprovidingmorecomfortableaccommodationforthosewaitingto serveanddealingwithanyproblemsofaccess.SinceApril1992allcourtshavepro- videdaspecialhelplineonwhichprospectivejurorscancallarecordedmessagetelling themwhethertheyareneededatcourtthefollowingday. 1.5, Thequestionofwhatverdictsareavailableandhowtheyshouldbeusedmustbeof substantialinteresttocitizenswhoareaskedtoserveonjuries. However,thepaper pointsoutthatthedebateaboutthefutureofthenotprovenverdictisnotsimplycon- cernedwithjurytrials,sincethenotprovenverdictisavailabletoandreturnedbyjudges sittingaloneinallsummarycourts.Thepaperaccordinglybeginsbyconsideringthe operationofthejurysystem,andthendiscussesthefutureofthenotprovenverdict. Theconsequencesforjuriesofanychangeinthethreeverdictsystem,suchastheargu- mentsforandagainstretentionofthesimplemajoritysystem, arediscussedasthe Hnkingissuebetweenconsiderationofjuriesandverdicts. 1.6. TheGovernmentwouldwelcomethefullestpossibledebateontheseimportantissues beforeitreachesfirmconclusionsonthewayforward.Thepapersetsoutsomepro- posalstorchangewhichtheGovernmentseesasdesirableinprinciple,andinvitesviews on other issues without making positive proposals. The Government emphasises, however,thatinrelationtothispaperastotheotherswhichformpartofthereview,it willtakecarefulaccountofcommentsreceivedfromallquartersbeforeitreachescon- clusions. 6 PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit Chapter 2 JURY SERVICE 2.1. Juryserviceisanextremelyimportantdutywhichplaysasignificantpartinourcrimi- nallaw.Itisanessentialfeatureofoursystemofjurytrialthatjuriesshouldasfaras possibleberepresentativeofsocietyasawhole.Mostcitizensaccepttheimportanceof juryserviceandthejustificationforgivingupsomeoftheirtimetoperformthatduty. Thereisaneedtoensurethatthe system gives dueweight totheinterestsofthe citizenswhoarebeingaskedtoserveasjurors,andthatthecourtsdoalltheycanto obtainjurieswhicharebothwillingtoserveandfullyrepresentativeofsocietyasa whole. 2.2. Thispaperconsiderstireprocessandralesbywhichmembersofthepublicarecalled forjuryserviceandmakesproposalsforreducingthewasteofjurors’andthecourts’ time,improvingtheexperienceofthosecalledforjuryserviceandsecuringjurieswhich aremorerepresentativeofsocietyasawhole. THEFUNCTIONINGOFJURIES 2.3. Thispaperdoesnotexaminethefunctioningofthejuryasadecision-makingbody. Enquiryintotheproceedingsinthejuryroominparticulareaseshasalwaysbeendis- couragedforgoodreasons.Nothingshouldbodonetoexposejurorstoexternalpres- sureconcerningdecisionstheyareinthecourseofmakingorhavemade.Iloweverthe lawwhichisdesignedtoprotectjuriesfromsuchpressure,theContemptofCourtAct 1981,alsohastheeffectofpreventingbonafideresearchintotheeffectivenessofthe juryingeneral-anissuewhichisofconsiderableimportance.TheRoyalCommission onCriminalJustice1proposed (recommendation1)thattheActshouldhoamended toallowbonafideresearch,andtheGovernmentisconsideringthisrecommendation. ‘RoyalCommissiononCriminalJusticeReportCm2263 7 PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit Chapter3 THE SELECTION OF JURIES 3.1. TheprocedureforselectingajuryisdescribedinAnnexA.Briefly,theclerkofthecourt obtainsalistofnamesrandomlydrawnfromtheelectoralroll; sendstoeachofthem aRevisalNoticerequestingcertaindetailsnecessarytoestablishtheireligibility;draws upaListofAssizecontainingenoughnamestosupplyacourtsitting;citesthosejurors tocourtfortherelevantdates;andfinallyconductsaballotfromthosewhoattendon thedayoftrialtoselectfifteenforeachtrial. 3.2. Nocentralrecordofthenumberofpeoplecitedforjuryservice,orofthenumberof peoplewhoactuallyserve,iskept.Howeverweknowthatthereareabout1,300jury trialsheldeachyearinScotland.Thismeansthatjustunder20,000peoplewillactually serveonajury.Usingrecentresearch(seebelow)andtheexperienceofcourtclerksin thelargercourtsitispossibletoestimatethatabout100,000peoplearecitedforjury serviceeachyear.Theremaining80,000willnotserveforavarietyofreasons,perhaps becausetheyhavebeenexcused,orbecausethetrialstheyhavebeencitedforwillnot takeplace,orbecausetheirselectionischallengedbytheprosecutionordefence,or becausetheyaresimplynotselectedintheballotwhichtakesplaceonthedayoftrial. RESEARCHONJURYSELECTION 3.3. Inordertoshedlightontherelativeimportanceofthefactorswhichaffectthenumbers ofpotentialjurorswhofalloutoftheselectionprocessateachstage,TheScottishOffice commissionedasmallscaleresearchstudybasedontheselectionofjurorsinEdinburgh andGlasgow.AsummaryoftheinitialresultsofthisresearchisatAppendix1.Figure 1illustratesthenumberofpotentialjurorswhodroppedoutateachstage,basedonsix months5datafromEdinburghSheriffCourt(thefindingsfromtheothercourtswere broadly,similar,althoughthenumbersavailabletostudyweresmaller).Insummary, only68%ofthosesentRevisalNoticeswerecontacted;27%werethenexcludedbecause ofineligibilityorbecausetheyhadarighttobeexcused; 10%wereexcusedbytheclerk ofcourt; 1%failedtoturnupatcourtand1%wereobjectedtobythedefenceor prosecution.Attheendoftheprocessonly30%ofthoseapproachedwereavailable andeligibleforjuryservice,and8%actuallyserved. 8 PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit JuriesandVerdicts Figure1 AttritionintheprocessofjurorselectioninEdinburghSheriffCourt(based oninformationcollectedfortheperiodFebruary-August1993) 3.4. Thefactthatsuchalargeproportionofthepotential,jurorsapproachedwillnotbeused raisestwoissuesofconcern.Firstly,thatsuchareductionofwhatstartedoutasaran- domlyselectedpoolofjurorsmayresultinjurieswhicharelessrepresentativethanthey oughttobe.Secondly,thatlargenumbersofpeoplemaybeinconveniencedunneces- sarily,andsomaybecomedisenchantedbytheexperienceandperhapslesswillingto carryoutjurydutiesinthefuture.Thefollowingsectionsofthispaperdiscussinmore detailthesucceedingstagesofthejuryselectionprocessandthevariousinfluenceson selection.Whereappropriate,viewsaresoughtonproposalsforchange. THEELECTORALREGISTER 3.5. TheElectoralRegister,fromwhichthenamesofprospectivejurorsaredrawn,isnot alwayscompleteoruptodate.AccordingtotheOfficeofPopulationCensusesand Surveysabout7%oftheeligiblepopulationarenotregistered.Itislikelytobemost 9 PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit JuriesandVerdicts deficientinyoungpeople,thoselivinginrentedfurnishedaccommodationandnew Commonwealthcitizens2.Thenumberofinaccurateaddressesintheregisterrisessig- nificantlyduringtheyearinwhichitisinforce.TheRoyalCommissiononCriminal Justicehasurged(recommendation213)electoralregistrationofficerstoensurethat electoralrollsarecomprehensiveandtheGovernmentendorsesthisrecommen- dation. THEREVISALNOTICE 3.6. Anothersourceofpotentialbiasinjuryselectionisthecontactsuccessoftheinitial enquiry(RevisalNotice).Thiswasonly68%intherecentresearchstudy.Someofthe failurewasbecauseofchangedaddresses,etc(10%ofcases).But23%didnotrespond atall.Peopleareunderageneraldutytocomplywiththecourt’srequestsforinfor- mationtoenableittocompilelistsofjurors.Howeveritisdisturbingthatsuchapro- portionofthemappeartobefailingtocomply.Thereisacaseforcreatingaspecific offenceoffadingtoreturnaRevisalNoticeandtheGovernmentismindedto doso.Viewswouldbewelcome. 3.7. Figure2showstheoutcomeofRevisalNoticesissuedtopotentialjurorsintheperiod coveredbytherecentresearchstudy.Apartfromthe32%notcontacted,27%ofpoten- tialjurorswereexcludedatthatstage.Thesewillhavebeenmainlythosewhoarestatu- torilydisqualifiedorwhowereentitledtoexemptiononrequest-thesecategoriesare listedinAnnexB.Somepotentialjurorsmaybeexcusedbytheclerkofcourtatthis stagetoo,if,forexample,theyhaveaconvincingreasonwhytheyshouldnotservein thenextsixmonths.4%ofthosewhoweresentrevisalnoticesweresoexcusedatthat stageintheresearchstudy.However,mostrequestsforexcusalaremadewhenjurors arecitedtocourtforagivendate(seebelow). ELIGIBILITYFORJURYSERVICE 3.8. Thelawoneligibilityforjuryserviceiscontainedinsection1of,andSchedule2to,the LawReform (MiscellaneousProvisions) (Scodand)Act 1980andissummarisedin AnnexBtothispaper.Thereappearstobenocaseforageneralreviewofeligibility. HowevertherearetworecommendationsmadebytheRoyalCommissiononCriminal JusticeonwhichtheGovernmentwouldwishtocanvassviewsforimplementationin Scotland. PERSONSONBAIL 3.9. Underthepresentarrangementsthosewhohavebeenconvictedofanoffence,except thosewhohavebeensentencedtoimprisonmentforthreemonthsormoreandwhose 2EleetoralRegistrationin1991,OPCS1993 10 PrintedimagedigitisedbytheUniversityofSouthamptonLibraryDigitisationUnit
The list of books you might like
