At what age......

[irc]

Old enough for jury service yet gets bunged in a young offenders unit? Manchester beaks getting soft?

Where else would a 19 year old go?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Her_Majest ... nstitution

[thirdcrank]

I don't know what specific offence might show on his record (it may say what he was charged with in the links but if so, I have forgotten ) Let's suppose it's something serious-sounding like contempt of court. There's a suggestion that his future will be ruined because a judge somehow over-reacted. Perhaps the answer would be for a note to be added to the record explaining what happened. Something on the lines of "While serving on a jury, pulled a sicky to be able to go to the theatre." That would mean any potential employer could be apprised of what actually happened, and not misled by the judge.

[irc]

I don't know what specific offence might show on his record (it may say what he was charged with in the links but if so, I have forgotten ) Let's suppose it's something serious-sounding like contempt of court. There's a suggestion that his future will be ruined because a judge somehow over-reacted. Perhaps the answer would be for a note to be added to the record explaining what happened. Something on the lines of "While serving on a jury, pulled a sicky to be able to go to the theatre." That would mean any potential employer could be apprised of what actually happened, and not misled by the judge.

Not sure how much help that would be. An employer might think if he can't turn up when the penalty is jail what chance is there he'll turn up for work 5 days a week when an employer's sanctions are weaker and involve much hassle and possible costs. Anyway, if he gets as far as an interview he can explain to a potential employer why he thought going to a show was more important than doing his legal duty. Maybe the employer will be sympathetic?


I don't see adding explanations to a criminal record as a practical idea anyway. Anything other than the actual crime will be open to debate. Next thing speeders will be wanting "but only 38 in a 30 limit with good weather and dry roads" next to the 3 pts on the license.

[J.Y.Kelly]

In England it's 10 years.

[thirdcrank]

..... An employer might think if he can't turn up when the penalty is jail what chance is there he'll turn up for work 5 days a week when an employer's sanctions are weaker and involve much hassle and possible costs.....

Exactly.

[byegad]

Fraud is a bad one to get lumbered with as a juror.

A story I heard, no names no pack drill, was that during the consideration of a verdict for a fraud trial a jury member realised that he* was the only person in the room who understood what the defendant was accused of and, if he did it, how he might have done the crime. He spoke to an usher voicing the opinion that there was no way the jury could give a fair verdict. The answer? 'That's how juries work.' Not very reassuring if you are ever on the wrong side of the courtroom.

*Mathematics graduate and business man.

[reohn2]

I watched soft lad bleating on the news last night,saying how he thought he should have been punished but not put in with all those murderers,robbers and other criminals.

He should have been let out the day after Boxing day IMHO.

All the freedom with none of the responsibility

[DaveP]

Well he said "Sorry!" so they let him out early, in time for Christmas.
I can't help feeling he's been shortchanged - they used to hand out a free ticket to the Antipodes for a lot less than wot 'e dun!

[thirdcrank]

I think it's probably right that a fraud trial bamboozles most of a jury, but that's more to do with lawyers' theatricals than some inherent stupidity of the man in the street.

Anyway, the thread's more about how people fail to appreciate how seriously lawyers take the law (and themselves.) Many witnesses end up being mucked about as much as jurors or even more so. As police officers are often called as witnesses, it's hardly surprising that they are often mucked about. ( In one sense, it's part of the job and I spent a lot of my early police service, polishing the benches of Leeds Town Hall with the seat of my trousers. Probably a good legal grounding, but efficiency soon improved with the introduction of paid police overtime.) I remember one former colleague who was warned for Crown Court when he was due to take an Open University exam. He was refused a deferral of the exam and so had to repeat the entire year's study for a resit the following year. A couple of years later, I was talking to a local academic who also moonlighted for the OU. This incident came up in the conversation and he explained they had been getting so many silly requests for deferrals they had decided to take a stand. When I suggested this had been the wrong occasion to act tough, explaining the serious consequences for a police officer who decided to ignore an order to attend the crown court, the answer was they they had not realised what would happen. If senior university academics don't get it, it's hardly surprising that their students don't.

Talking of theatricals, perhaps the moral of the story is that if you wear fancy dress, not everybody will take you seriously. (Oh dear, what's that loud banging on the door? )

[JohnW]

..............One is probably the healthy (?) growth in people's belief in their own rights...................

Wrongdoers of all ages and in all situations are told all about their rights - it's the idea of responsibilities that's not acknowledged.