header-logo header-logo

22 May 2008 / Martin Rackstraw
Issue: 7322 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

In the balance

Martin Rackstraw weighs up jury eligibility issues and the arguments for the removal of potential bias in juries

Recent government measures aimed at reforming criminal justice have the look of solutions searching for problems. None more so than the changes to the rules on jury eligibility brought into effect by s 321 and Sch 33 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) which removed the bar to police officers, prison officer, lawyers and others involved in the administration of justice from serving. At a stroke, certainty has been replaced by uncertainty, and the predictable flood of appeals has begun.

In R v Khan [2008] EWCA Crim 531, [2008] All ER (D) 212 (Mar), and in R v Alan I unreported October 2007 CA, the court has considered a series of appeals revolving around jury bias. These cases followed the House of Lords' judgment in the conjoined appeals in R v Adbroikof; R v Green; R v Williamson [2007] UKHL 37, [2007] All ER (D) 226

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Clarke Willmott—Matthew Roach

Partner joins commercial property team in Taunton office

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Farrer & Co—Richard Lane

Londstanding London firm appoints new senior partner

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Bird & Bird—Sue McLean

Commercial team in London welcomes technology specialist as partner

NEWS
What safeguards apply when trust corporations are appointed as deputy by the Court of Protection? 
Disputing parties are expected to take part in alternative dispute resolution (ADR), where this is suitable for their case. At what point, however, does refusing to participate cross the threshold of ‘unreasonable’ and attract adverse costs consequences?
When it comes to free legal advice, demand massively outweighs supply. 'Millions of people are excluded from access to justice as they don’t have anywhere to turn for free advice—or don’t know that they can ask for help,' Bhavini Bhatt, development director at the Access to Justice Foundation, writes in this week's NLJ
When an ex-couple is deciding who gets what in the divorce or civil partnership dissolution, when is it appropriate for a third party to intervene? David Burrows, NLJ columnist and solicitor advocate, considers this thorny issue in this week’s NLJ
NLJ's latest Charities Appeals Supplement has been published in this week’s issue
back-to-top-scroll