A rash of cases of misconduct by jurors – including researching cases on the internet – prompted specific new penalties under the 2015 Criminal Justice and Courts Act. But serving on a jury has long carried perils – including having ones home and lands destroyed for returning the wrong verdict, or prison time for “being embraced”. Read more.
Jurors have been sent to prison for breaching strict rules to ensure a fair trial – especially the requirement that they reach a verdict solely on the basis of the evidence presented in court. A rash of cases prompted the creation of a specific offence under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. Examples are listed in an academic paper (pictured).
A judge declined to lift a temporary injunction preventing the media from naming two girls who carried out a brutal murder when they were only 13 and 14. Both had now turned 18, the age when teenagers’ right to anonymity would normally end. They were tried in an adult court with no automatic anonymity, but an injunction was put in place to protect them. The Press Association applied to have it lifted, but a judge extended the ban pending psychiatric reports. The court heard one of the girls had tried several times to kill herself. Read more.