Jury Service

I wouldn't want to do it mainly because my son is disabled and though my wife is his carer he's still a handful and I wouldn't want to be away.
On the back of that life is very stressful because of this and my mental health suffered I can't concentrate, memory seems to be non existent.
 
gman said:
Oh my. Thanks, I didn't know that.
Click to expand...


yeagh its my wifes name and our address and its still ongoing... managed to get her position as removed from cmpany and changed the address... but anyone can look at the company history and it still shows she set it up and the old address...... companies house really slow in getting the company struck off though :(
 
ancient_mariner said:
Assuming you do end up on a case, I'd like to thank you for taking the role seriously and doing your best in something so important.
Click to expand...


I presume thats sarcasm as its clear I dont want to do it?
 
Well today I got a phone call from the jury service people... unlike the letters/emails that just said we are aware and i still have to do it.. this lady was more sympathetic and at the end said i would be excused from jury service on this occasion :) Not deffered no other dates asked for..

As its took 48 yrs to pull my name out of the that this time.. I am hopeful I wont get the call again :)

All I can say is.... Phew! :)
 
Last edited:
That seems like the best solution for you but frustrating for many of us who would liked to have done Jury Service but never asked.

Dave
 
Dave Canon said:
That seems like the best solution for you but frustrating for many of us who would liked to have done Jury Service but never asked.

Dave
Click to expand...
One of them things I guess. Couples spend years trying to get pregnant and have to endure so many happy announcements. Got to say I'm don't feel too bad for you :) :)
 
KIPAX said:
yeagh its my wifes name and our address and its still ongoing... managed to get her position as removed from cmpany and changed the address... but anyone can look at the company history and it still shows she set it up and the old address...... companies house really slow in getting the company struck off though :(
Click to expand...

That sounds frustrating. Aye, it's a bit annoying all the historical records, especially from the past when it was the Director's home address reveal rather than being able to use the business address.
 
KIPAX said:
Well today I got a phone call from the jury service people... unlike the letters/emails that just said we are aware and i still have to do it.. this lady was more sympathetic and at the end said i would be excused from jury service on this occasion :) Not deffered no other dates asked for..

As its took 48 yrs to pull my name out of the that this time.. I am hopeful I wont get the call again :)

All I can say is.... Phew! :)
Click to expand...

Something rings a bell that when you've been excused you get prioritised in the future for a while. It might have just been chit chat with others I've talked to who were excused, including my wife, but perhaps too coincidental that they were all called up again quite quickly. Hopefully I'm not the bearer of bad news here though! lol

Although until they use recorded delivery.... :whistle:
 
Touch wood, I've never been called, and I wouldn't want to be really due to my hearing impairment, I know they have loop systems in most courts but any type of strong accent is non-understandable to me, plus beards and moustaches can make lipreading very challenging.

My mum was called a few years ago now, she got two cases but thankfully nothing traumatic. Someone I used to work with got called and ended up in a complicated Fraud trial - she said it exhausted her and battered her mind concentrating on and following the convoluted scheme the defendant had rigged up.
 
A few exceptional fraud cases may exclude a Jury but one case recently in Glasgow went on for 20 months. This complex fraud case resulted in two defendants being found guilty. They started with 15 jurors as required by the Sottish system but lost several along the way; one became pregnant, one arrested for benefits fraud. There have been long debates about whether using a jury in such cases is the best way.

Dave
 
Dave Canon said:
A few exceptional fraud cases may exclude a Jury but one case recently in Glasgow went on for 20 months. This complex fraud case resulted in two defendants being found guilty. They started with 15 jurors as required by the Sottish system but lost several along the way; one became pregnant, one arrested for benefits fraud. There have been long debates about whether using a jury in such cases is the best way.

Dave
Click to expand...

Welcome to Glasgow haha
 
Dave Canon said:
A few exceptional fraud cases may exclude a Jury but one case recently in Glasgow went on for 20 months. This complex fraud case resulted in two defendants being found guilty. They started with 15 jurors as required by the Sottish system but lost several along the way; one became pregnant, one arrested for benefits fraud. There have been long debates about whether using a jury in such cases is the best way.

Dave
Click to expand...
I was on the jury for a lengthy case at the Old Bailey a fair while ago. I kept seeing another bunch of jurors in the canteen. I ended up talking to one of them and it turned out they were on the Jubilee Line extension fraud case and they’d been there for almost two years by that point. It involved highly complex financial dealings that had to be explained in simpler terms for non-financial people to understand. Eventually the trial collapsed and the jury were dismissed. I do wonder if there was a better method of dealing with a case like this?
 
boogie man said:
I was on the jury for a lengthy case at the Old Bailey a fair while ago. I kept seeing another bunch of jurors in the canteen. I ended up talking to one of them and it turned out they were on the Jubilee Line extension fraud case and they’d been there for almost two years by that point. It involved highly complex financial dealings that had to be explained in simpler terms for non-financial people to understand. Eventually the trial collapsed and the jury were dismissed. I do wonder if there was a better method of dealing with a case like this?
Click to expand...

According to Wiki:

"The juror who brought about the collapse said that the trial caused him loss of earnings that threatened his ability to pay Oxford University fees for a course set to start in October 2005. The juror who was due to marry lost her wedding date and her job."

"The cost of the police investigation, legal prosecution and rest of the trial including juror's outlay was about £60 million."

It looks like long trials aren't really practical for public when it comes jurors. Maybe if they are prepared to spend such money it could have been better to have a panel of experts in the field (i.e. Forensic Accountants, Auditors etc) as the jury instead of a layman jury, who could potentially understand and decipher things much faster and potentially cheaper overall?
 
I thought there had been a plan to move complex fraud cases away from jury trials?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top