Jury Service

[purch]

Has anyone else here been called up for jury service?

I've been contemplating writing something about this for some time. Now that end of year is near, and when I think back over my experiences over its term, I feel a need to share (some parts) my most memorable experience of 2010. I cannot mention names, dates etc. but this was my experience

It all started with a letter in the post near the beginning of the year. I had been working overseas so that by the time I actually got home and opened it it was too late. I was up for jury duty whether I liked it or not. I scrambled to find a justice of the peace to get me out of any penalty and delayed it for a month. After receiving a letter to say I had been chosen for a following month, I informed my workplace what was happening, and that I could be out of action for an entire month...with pay thanks very much.

So I turned up at the District Court on Vic Square for an introductory seminar...very enlightening. You are told how to rank different types of evidence, be it forensic/scientific, the words of witnesses and police, or (ranked the lowest) someone's demeanor on the stand. You take an oath, which essentially prohibits you from mentioning anything that was said in the jury room for the rest of your life, amen. You are split up into groups and given a juror number. After that you are sent an email/sms telling you which groups are due to turn up for selection every morning or two. Eventually your number might come up...but they pick about 20 people for a trial, where only 12 are required...the defence has the right to challenge 3 jurors before they take their seat in the jury box. Your number might come up in a ballett, in the court room before the trial commences. If you sit down in the jurors box then you're now one of 12 jurors.

I got to the jury box for 2 trials during my service. The charges were the same in each case: Unlawful sexual intercourse and rape. Not very nice subject matter, and as matter of course the alleged victim will invariably give their evidence first, giving all in the court room a very deflated feeling. But there was no guilty verdict in either case, and thankfully so from my perspective/opinion, given the evidence. The first case felt a bit like "12 angry men" during deliberation...the second was more clear cut.

A few points:

1. I loved the time in the court room listening to the evidence, no matter how awful it may have sounded at times.
2. As a scientist myself, I was surprised how poorly some so called "experts" performed in court. For example:

Prosecution: "Ms X, can you explain to the ladies and gentlemen of the jury how fingerprint evidence works"
Ms X: "Well, at a crime scene..."

3. The worst part is deliberation. I had not felt like punching a wall for more than a decade.
4. The police IT department needs to pick up their act...the delays in court were abominable.
5. I was surprised at how easily someone can be arrested on one persons testament to the police. Both of the alleged victims were shown to be clearly telling porky pies after hearing/seeing all the evidence. Very sad really, given that the crime of rape is so hard to prosecute to begin with. However, I am surprised that the police proceeded with the lack of evidence that they had, and had put young mens' life on hold for 2 years or more.

I don't think I can mention any more without breaking my oath...there is plenty more I could say...but I would be interested to hear other peoples views, or other peoples' experiences if they have been called up before.

[Barto]

Just say you're prejudiced against all races.

[trev]

That is fascinating reading.

About 8 years ago a good mate of mine was accused of same
Despite him being happily married with a newborn son and having a rock solid alibi (he was with about seven of his mates at the time the alleged offence occured)
He was arrested, charged and denied bail on the word of a girl whose advances he rejected for the above reasons.

Her allegations cost him house (sold to pay for his defence) and almost his marriage.

After 9 months in remand and a three day trial,during which the alleged victem was proven to be lying and the investigating detective was shown to have tampered with evidence, it took the jury 3 minutes to aquit him!

It was a mind boggling example of how one person can adversely affect so many lives
and how the justice system is not and never will be, infalliable.

[fish]

A very interesting story purch (and trev).

I got called up about 20 years ago when I was on an extended holiday overseas, so I didn't have to do it.

Am wondering whether I can be called up again?

[Footy Chick]

I'm hanging to be called up...I'd love to do Jury duty!

But alas, I've never received that little piece of paper

[Psyber]

My wife got called up for jury duty, but got a letter from her GP about her poor health and unfitness to attend. It was less than a year before she died.

I was accused of rape in 1988, by a former patient whose repeated expressions of interest I had rejected as gently as I possibly could.
I was fortunate it did not get to trial, partly because she had form of making similar claims against others in the past.
The other factor was that she had previously written to the medical board claiming that I had been sexually involved with her, but asserting it was seduction not rape in that letter.
However, it did cost me time explaining the situation to my medical defence fund and then fronting up to CIB questioning with their lawyer.

A barrister friend of mine was incensed when the Bannon government removed the power of the Magistrates Court to throw out such charges for lack of evidence and introduced a policy that all such sexual misconduct allegations should go straight to the Supreme Court. He said, "That means that if you are in a lift with a woman and she asks you to give her $5000 or she'll allege you tried to rape her in the lift between floors pay her because it will cost you more than that just to appear in the court for one day to refute the allegation!"

[purch]

A very interesting story purch (and trev).

I got called up about 20 years ago when I was on an extended holiday overseas, so I didn't have to do it.

Am wondering whether I can be called up again?

Yes, you can, as long as you haven't acquired a criminal record in the meantime.

I believe that if you are called up for a second time withing 3 years of a previous service then you can get out of it.

IIRC, names are selected randomly from the electoral roll, and then they check that you don't have a record before a letter gets sent to your address.

[locky801]

That is fascinating reading.

About 8 years ago a good mate of mine was accused of same
Despite him being happily married with a newborn son and having a rock solid alibi (he was with about seven of his mates at the time the alleged offence occured)
He was arrested, charged and denied bail on the word of a girl whose advances he rejected for the above reasons.

Her allegations cost him house (sold to pay for his defence) and almost his marriage.

After 9 months in remand and a three day trial,during which the alleged victem was proven to be lying and the investigating detective was shown to have tampered with evidence, it took the jury 3 minutes to aquit him!

It was a mind boggling example of how one person can adversely affect so many lives
and how the justice system is not and never will be, infalliable.

Hopefully he took matters further to recoup his losses, after being found not guilty his legal costs should have been paid by the State

[once_were_warriors]

Did it 4 years ago , jury foreperson on a murder trial.

Very taxing time with having the understanding that our verdict could send someone to gaol for 20 plus years.

Found the court process interesting and the fact that the jury consisting of 12 ordinary people become so dedicated in analysing all facts and aspects of the trial

it actually changed my opinion on society.

[GWW]

it actually changed my opinion on society.

In a good or bad way?

[once_were_warriors]

it actually changed my opinion on society.

In a good or bad way?

Good way

The old saying - Never judge a book by its cover , rang true

[purch]

it actually changed my opinion on society.

In a good or bad way?

Good way

The old saying - Never judge a book by its cover , rang true

Spot on..I finished my service with the same feeling. We are all very quick to judge, but life is full of surprises

[Brucetiki]

So no one's done a Homer Simpson on a Jury

[Drop Bear]

So no one's done a Homer Simpson on a Jury

All I can think about is Pauly Shore!

[wooly]

I'm hanging to be called up...I'd love to do Jury duty!

But alas, I've never received that little piece of paper

Move to Cairns, I was there about 3 months and got called up. About 50% of other employees that moved from Adelaide to Cairns were also called up - must have been a Jury shortage up there at the time. This was 15 years ago, so things may have changed.

Also got on a rape case. Japanese student was raped by son of family that were billeting her out. Very interesting and ended up finding him guilty. What was more interesting was after the case was finished we found out that this guy had already served time previously for rape.

[purch]

I'm hanging to be called up...I'd love to do Jury duty!

But alas, I've never received that little piece of paper

Move to Cairns, I was there about 3 months and got called up. About 50% of other employees that moved from Adelaide to Cairns were also called up - must have been a Jury shortage up there at the time. This was 15 years ago, so things may have changed.

Also got on a rape case. Japanese student was raped by son of family that were billeting her out. Very interesting and ended up finding him guilty. What was more interesting was after the case was finished we found out that this guy had already served time previously for rape.

Yep, very true..previous charges and convictions cannot be raised usually.

The other thing I felt though, was that the police are only there to provide the evidence - to present the charges before the court. The jury is there to convict and the judge is there to guide the jury before deliberation and then to sentence, if found guilty. However, I really felt that the police were trying to convict through their statements in the court room, rather than tell the facts they had obtained. Sure, they have invested time and $ in the cases, but I really felt disappointed with their performance after hearing all the evidence. By that I mean any logical man or woman would have found these people not guilty, and I'm surprised that the police didn't see it earlier....before it went to trial.

p.s. In terms of jury, women outnumbered men in both trials.

[smac]

Never been on a jury but was obliged to provide evidence in the Snowtown murder trials (I was managing a financial institution branch where the killers transacted on the accounts of some dead folk). Fascinating process surrounding the trial, but really wish I could forget what I heard in that room.

[Magpiespower]

Burnt out lawyer I know used to work for the DPP.

His advice if you get pinged on something: SAY ABSOLUTELY NOTHING!

Reckons most people get done coz they fess up during a police interview...

[purch]

Anyone been called up lately?

[Footy Chick]

still waiting