[Closed] Avoiding Jury Service

Perhaps I should have started a new thread called "delaying jury service"? I'm ok to take part for either 2 or 8 weeks. I just think it would be fair to give appropriate notice. My paperwork says that I have to turn up on day 1 regardless, so who knows what it'll be? This means I have to plan for the worst case which will be a bit of a task in the 4 business days I have before starting (with teams in 4 timezones)

Im completely against compulsory jury service, especially as suggested by convert.

Mainly due to the fact I've seen that impact on a friend who was a juror on a 6 week case related to child sex-trafficking. What he heard/saw on that case has haunted him since.

I sincerely believe Jury service should be opt-out. Or at the least you can have the option to not do certain types of case.

Genuine question for those who state that they can't be off work for two weeks - why is this? What's going to happen if you get sick, have an accident, go on holiday etc? I spent 6 or 7 years consulting on a day rate, so being off work was a big hit, so had to build in a buffer... but all the same didn't like it and got into some bad habits mentally about 'needing' to work,

Im completely against compulsory jury service, especially as suggested by convert.

Mainly due to the fact I’ve seen that impact on a friend who was a juror on a 6 week case related to child sex-trafficking. What he heard/saw on that case has haunted him since.

Interesting thought. I would imagine given what he saw and heard there will be no one in the land more passionate about these purpotraitors having justice served on them, which in our society requires jurors. But you think it would probably be best they didn't have a part in that justice system they will be keen is happening. I wonder if they do too. Lots of people in police forces and child welfare agencies sleep badly because of what they witness but would have to be dragged kicking and screaming from doing it as the very act of seeing it enhances their desire to make sure the work is done. Did/do they have any pre-existing circumstances that meant they were vulnerable and suseptable to issues after hearing what they heard? There's a fine line between excusing those that would find such a case too harrowing and getting a jury of sociopath oddballs as everyone else has cried off for their own personal health.

As you say though, plenty of other cases exist and within limits everyone could be useful on one jury case or another even in a compulsory system. At the other end of scale I've always wondered how excruciatingly frustrating it must be prosecuting a super complex insider trading or business fraud case for a jury with no prior knowledge and average or (if it's going to be representative, significantly below average intelligence). Having to dumb down incredibly complex issues to dribbling fool level (see the way so many news papers, radio stations or TV channels deal with complex current affairs) yet still have justice done must be like beating your head against a wall. It would almost be better if the jury were all accountants or similar to have a chance of following along and appreciating nuance.

Genuine question for those who state that they can’t be off work for two weeks

In principle I agree, but it can depend exactly when those two (or 8) weeks are. I deferred my first date at the request of my employers as it was in the lead up to the end of the practical coursework element and I was the only teacher of two of the subjects that I taught at a 6th form college and there was no way that they could get a suitably qualified substitute.

I did 2 weeks on a 2 day case just before Xmas.

It changed my view on the system.

It certainly enlightened me to that I wouldn't want to be in the dock as an accused innocent.....

I'd have no confidence in the correct outcome coming out.

Mine was a domestic abuse case with extrennuating and complicated circumstances -

I did 2 weeks on a 2 day case just before Xmas.

It changed my view on the system.

It certainly enlightened me to that I wouldn’t want to be in the dock as an accused innocent…..

I’d have no confidence in the correct outcome coming out.

Maybe if more people did jury service there might be enough outrage that the system might be improved.

The Secret Barrister is a fascinating and awful read, though his conclusion is interesting.

Genuine question for those who state that they can’t be off work for two weeks – why is this?

The court system seems to be entirely focused on the timetables of the judges and to a lesser extent barristers (I would say solicitors but I know enough solicitors who specialise in legal aid work to know this isn't true).

There is compensation available to businesses but for a small business knowing someone might be away for a day or possibly six weeks doesn't help. For a short uncertain period cover for any skilled job is likely to be impossible to find at a rate covered by the compensation, particularly in a time when COVID is stretching things to the limit. The compensation doesn't cover or negate penalty clauses for time over-runs etc

For a short uncertain period cover for any skilled job is likely to be impossible to find at a rate covered

I was working 4am-9am and 7pm.till 9pm and doing jury duty....while I'm easily replaceable not at short notice for short periods.....(project engineer)

Next time it will be a case of whistle civic duty or not.

Please tell me you’re the defendent…

Fortunately not - it's at a coroners court.

Mrs EGf deferred hers about 2 months ago as her mum was on end of life care (she passed away 2 days after jury service was due to start) She could get called up again in 12 months time.
Me? ‘As an ex prison officer of 16 years, I can tell by just looking your honour’. 🤭

Im completely against compulsory jury service, especially as suggested by convert.

Mainly due to the fact I’ve seen that impact on a friend who was a juror on a 6 week case related to child sex-trafficking. What he heard/saw on that case has haunted him since.

I sincerely believe Jury service should be opt-out. Or at the least you can have the option to not do certain types of case.

To be able to pick and choose might not only delay cases, but put an end to trial by jury by your peers and be left in the hands of a single individual.

Thats not a good direction for the law to be taking.

To be able to pick and choose might not only delay cases, but put an end to trial by jury by your peers and be left in the hands of a single individual.

Thats not a good direction for the law to be taking.

I get that, but what if the case affects the member of the jury to a large extent?
Some people could cope with say a child abuse/murder case more than others. What if the case left a member or members of a jury ‘mentally scarred’ ( for want of a more sensitive phrase) surely that’s not a good thing?

Yeah, I tend to agree, it keeps things more fair, it's a civic duty unless you have a reasonable excuse, family issues, health issues etc.

I suppose it's easy enough to get out of it you want to, by cooking up some reason, or even just saying your a bit mentally fragile and will just call guily/innocent regardless of the trial - that would probably get you kicked off the list.

But I don't think you should just be able to opt out by default.

What if the case left a member or members of a jury ‘mentally scarred’ ( for want of a more sensitive phrase) surely that’s not a good thing?

No it is not a good thing, and I can sympathize with those who have to go through such cases. Obviously it will be highly traumatic.

But then again, everyone connected to the case from the lawyers to the judge to social work to the victims themselves will have to deal with it. Why then make members of the jury exempt.

I expect those who have sat on such cases and been affected by it can seek counselling.

be nice to have an AI jury that could have it's memory wiped after every case, though racial bias in machine learning doesn't have a good rep.