The channel today we talking about jury service and which I thought would go hand-in-hand
double jeopardy but if you're just joining our legal community don't forget to like comment
subscribe and that Bell, otherwise you might miss out new videos and a few interesting
behind-the-scenes footage and further legal analysis jump over to blackbelt secrets at
the link in the description Jury service and being tried by a jury is one of those things
that is famously enshrined in law from Magna Carta and the clauses 39 and 40 which reads
as follows no free man shall be seized and imprisoned dispossessed outlawed exiled or
ruined it anyway nor in any way proceeded against except by the lawful judgement of
his peers and the law of the land to as if you are being prosecuted and tried for an
offence so long as it's not a summary only offence you have the right to elect trial
by jury and this is actually something of an important discussion because many defendants
come before the magistrates court not realising that they might well have the right to elect
trial by jury if they were given appropriate legal advice they should be told of the pros
and cons of having a trial at the magistrates court as against having a trial by jury in
the Crown Court for example a trial at the magistrates court can often be much quicker
can often be much less publicity because publicity tends to come to the Crown courts because
they generally attract more serious cases however statistically you are more likely
to be convicted in the magistrates court and you might well think that it will be more
difficult to convince 12 members of a jury that you are guilty of an offence than a magistrate
however if you do have your trial in the magistrates court and you are convicted you have an automatic
right of appeal to the Crown Court although it won't be heard by a jury it will be a Crown
Court judge and to magistrates but nonetheless if the child is on indictment or it's an indictable
offence and you elect Crown Court trial then you will be tried with a jury jury service
itself is not something that you get paid for as a juror although there is a provision
for expenses you get notified of jury service through the post having been chosen randomly
from the electoral register and you must respond within seven days there are limited circumstances
in which you can ask to delay your jury service but ultimately if you are called upon it is
your duty to do it very interesting story in fact and if I find a link to it or put
it in the description but a judge was called upon to do jury service and wrote for an exemption
the response came back to say no even judges need to sit on a jury at the judge wrote back
and said no I really can't sit on the jury on this case because I am the judge trying
the case and the response from the office again was well you need to take that up with
the presiding judge of the court the judge responded again to say I am the presiding
judge of the court and I really can't sit on this jury and ultimately judge was excused
joy service can have quite an impact on your life that you might not otherwise have expected
initially the estimate and I suppose the average is that your jury service will last for 10
working days although it is not uncommon for cases to last for 56 weeks or even months
and you will be expected to turn up at court every day.
Whether you're employed your self-employed or even if you're not working there is a daily
amount of allowances that you can claim which again put the link in the description that
some unexpected consequences of jury service might be that your employer refuses to give
you the time off but in fact they must give you the time off for jury service if your
employer decides to sack you or threatened to sack you that might be grounds for unfair
dismissal because after all it's jury service and you don't have a choice all this on top
of because of the fact that the case that your us to hear might well be very unpleasant
and it may affect you for a long time to come jury bundle is very often contain lots of
photographs you might be asked to watch video footage of something that may be very disturbing
if this is the case there is support available and obviously you're encouraged to seek that
out discussing the trial or anything about the trial is obviously completely forbidden
except of course with other jury members in the deliberation room and you also quite honestly
cannot publish anything about the trial online or in any other way I cannot stress enough
that this is contempt of court you might be fined and even sent to prison so trial by
jury is often a hotly debated topic because it can be time consuming it can be expensive
let me know in the comments what you think trial by jury is it something that we should
keep is it something that we should protect let me know your thoughts we want to double
jeopardy it is a well established doctrine that no one should be punished twice if they
are acquitted or convicted in the first set of proceedings on the same set of facts and
this is often referred to as butter for convict and okra far quit it is worth bearing in mind
however that if there is a hung jury which means the jury was unable to come to a conclusion
then the prosecution may seek a retrial it also doesn't apply in the case of a simple
caution because a simple caution is neither a sentence nor a criminal conviction the leading
case on double jeopardy was Connelly and the Director of Public Prosecutions in 1964 it
was a lengthy judgement which set out essentially nine principles broadly setting out the principle
that I've described where the facts of the case are either the same or substantially
the same as those in the first proceedings these principles been refined over the years
where different questions have come to the court and the court had to decide how to apply
these principles in any given set of circumstances and it is those words that has led to a lot
of litigation on the subject in other words whether or not the facts were the same or
substantially the same to the degree that it would prevent another trial and if the
defendant is acquitted but it's found that there was interference with a witness or a
jury member then the High Court can quash the acquittal and then there can be a retrial
in that case also a great film with Sir Anthony Hopkins that plays on this principle is fracture
and I will link that in the description as well there are cause and you might well have
guessed some exceptions to this rule 34 has never applied in section 18 offences that's
grievous bodily harm with intent where a person is convicted of such an offence but then the
victim dies of the injuries the person can properly be tried with murder it makes sense
of course because murder is obviously much more serious than a section 18 offence and
it shouldn't matter that the person died much later and of course to be tried with murder
it's not a requirement that the person dies immediately from the injuries that have been
inflicted and finally although probably to be discussed in more detail in another video
there's a similar principle in civil litigation when you cannot just re-litigate the same
issue with new or better particulars so that's my overview of trial by jury and double jeopardy
which will form part one drop your questions and comments below which might form part of
part two in the meantime thanks watching don't forget to subscribe and I'll see you next
time