Jury Service – What to expect?

Lots of waiting around, cancellations, poor administration, time wasting and confusion.

That was my experience. Followed with go home on the Tuesday.

My experience was 10 years ago, not sure if any changes have been made post Covid.
As above, take a good book and be prepared for lots of hanging around. I only sat in one trial that took the second half of the first day and the first half of the second. Was selected for a second trial on the third day but after a lot of waiting around the trial was cancelled as the defendant pleaded guilty just as we were about to go in. Not required after that so released for the remainder of the two weeks.
Summed up, both fascinating (when in the courtroom and jury room for the trial) and dull (the rest of the time)

Lots of sitting about. Bring lunch, snacks and a good book.
Once a trial starts it can be quite interesting.

If the case is going to be a long one, or grotty, the judge should address this at the outset, before jury selection, last thing they want is a trial grinding to a halt halfway through.

in Glasgow, so might be different
You phone the day before and a message will tell you whether to turn up in court or not
if it's expected to be a long trial they will tell you in the jury summons
If she gets picked she will be amazed at the level of detail and just how long basic stuff , like where it happened, takes
courts are full of bad people so take care, we where told that sometimes folk would put used needles in the hand towel dispenser.

Been on Jury service 3 times ,all were very interesting cases and I found each one (for different reasons)fascinating, a window into another world.
As Frank says, there can be a lot of hanging around so tell her to take a good book.

If you do get selected you do get fed - so unless you have special dietary considerations no need to take anything more than a snack if that. And even if you do take food theres catering so theres cutlery.

Different courts and different cases will vary - the only constant is a lot of waiting - even not getting selected takes a long time. If you do get selected you'll wait around a lot, get sent home, have to wait to find out if you're required to come in the next day.

Its an important and potentially quite interesting thing to do but you dont feel very well treated - the court I did mine we we're told to arrive at 8am, by lunchtime they hadn't started the process of jury selection - several trials commencing so probably 100 or so potential jurors waiting for four or five hours....... no seats.

Lots of sitting about

Consider yourself lucky!

So just prep for bordom and discomfort and probably expect to get cold. Its non the less pretty interesting but the interesting stuff is a very small part of the time commitment.

Fair bit of sitting about waiting for something to happen.
I wasn't called on day 1 so went home by lunchtime. Day 2 was called & sat on an interesting 8 day trial. Day 9 was released.
No real dramas & the baddies are kept a long, long way away from you. Not much to worry about really, expect it's a bit boring if you don't get called & waiting to be called can be boring.
There was a cafe where I was so cutlery provided.
I'd do it again quite happily.

last thing they want is a trial grinding to a halt halfway through.

Halfway through - so at the 1 year mark? 🙂

'We spent almost two years sitting on a jury'

i spent 2 weeks on jury duty in december last year - soul destroying

If you had a good case then could be good. but mine was folk looking for a warm cell.

Many years ago my wife was at the Old Bailey in London, big murder/drugs trial. Took weeks, ended up being sequestered in a top London hotel, whole floor 'locked down' for them. No papers, no TV due to the trial being reported on. Coach with armed escort to and from the hotel due to previous witness intimidation. She liked it but heard some pretty gruesome details.

Was a total pain for me! I just got a phone call (which had to listened in on by a jury keeper) saying I'm not coming home tonight!

However pretty sure she was in the lucky/unlucky 1% and 99% of the time its boring.

I've been called twice and Mrs RR once (this year).  Neither of us saw a trial (we were both called but the trials never started, assume due to a last minute plea) and were sent home early (as early as end of day 2, as late as strat of week 2) when the court got to a point that they had more than enough jurors for the cases that they had.  I was worried about getting selected for a long one (esp my first summons which was the Old Bailey so big cases) as the sole income in the house this would have been an issue.

Both courts had large waiting rooms with a canteen area.  A set time for lunch and we'd be released to go and buy something outside of preferred.  I spent most of my time working (no issues with bringing in my laptop).

Mine in December was a total let down.

Scotland, so a slightly different system. Rang the number on the Monday and Tuesday (mine only started on the Tuesday) to listen to the recorded message telling me I wasn't needed. By Wednesday they hadn't bothered to update the message and it was still Tuesday's. On the Thursday they hadn't even bothered to turn the answerphone on; so I thought **** it - that's me done then I guess.

I got away with not being in either of the juries that they were picking for. First day we got away at lunch time and the second my number wasn't drawn for either so went home. That night called the number to see if I was needed a third day but no that was it. They did ask at the start of both trials if there was anyone who couldn't take part for any reason and I'd say that everyone over 60 stood up and talked to one of the clerk's. As mentioned above take a book!

I got called up at the start of 2020. After looking into it I soon realised that it was more than likely I'd be out of pocket due to the pittance they offer for loss of earnings. Was happy to do it but not at my expense. So told them that and they removed me from it. Turns out that I would never have had to go because covid then hit and the world went bonkers.
But the sheer bare faced cheek of them expecting you to lose out on your wages and then offer some paltry loss of earnings beggars belief. I'm astonished people actually do it. Unless you get paid by your employer then obviously that's a different story. They should pay your salary when you are called up at the very minimum, anything else is insulting.

I did it last year.

Take something to read, dont go expecting efficiency and professionalism, you feel like you could do a better job than some of the staff even those asking the questions in court (the state prosecutors tend to be shocking quality I guess because they are poorly paid compared to defence people). Lots of  ceremony, It isnt actually simple to follow once in you are in the court room and takes lots of concentration you will be tired by the end of the day. Sometimes you do feel like you are taking part in a TV drama or soap.

I had 2 cases. The first the young ish prosecution person had quite clearly not read the file before turning up, kept calling people wrong names, didnt have a clue what to say next. The 2nd case, the old fella had clearly been good in his time, but clear was too old. He couldnt remember what to say, the defence lawyer kept prompting him, he even turned to the judge a few times for guidance.

Everyone plays games ie evidence is presented that really isnt part of the case. In cross examination a solicitor tore in to a very  vulnerable witness in a way I thought was utterly disgusting, to the point I wanted to walk out.

Lots of sitting around doing nothing, lots of sitting around doing nothing, and lots of sitting around doing nothing.

You can just be getting in to the case and the next minute your are no longer needed due to a stupid comment made by a witness etc ie pointing out that the person in the dock is a drug dealer (although evident, its not part of the trial so all the dury have to be changed.)

I would do it again, this time expecting to be bored, and not expecting to see out some juicy trial.

Its is quite intimidating when you are sat fairly close to someone who has beaten people up, built like a brick, and you know is a nasty piece of work.... and then they walk past you as you go for a sandwich in your lunch break.

I went to Minshull street wehen I was called, the cafeteria wasn't working there so we all went out and got sandwiches for lunch. IIRC you get an allowance for food.

Be nice and poilte to the people running the registration desks. I was there on day 1 then sent home early afternoon and told to call in each evening to see if I'd be required to com in the following day. Was in work for 2 or 3days then got called back in, ended up on a trialf or a few days> I htikn that finished wednesday - might have been thursday - but was told I didn't need to come back, thankfully.

I got chatting to one of the admin staff who confirmed that the guys who'd been a total arse was required to come in and wait to be selected all day every day and was *ahem* highly unlikely to be selected, so was in essence just waiting folornly.

I had a lucky escape, when I was there they were picking the jusy for a nasty arson case that was expected to last several weeks

But the sheer bare faced cheek of them expecting you to lose out on your wages and then offer some paltry loss of earnings beggars belief. I’m astonished people actually do it. Unless you get paid by your employer then obviously that’s a different story. They should pay your salary when you are called up at the very minimum, anything else is insulting.

Forgot to say - I got where I work to change their policy when I got my letter. It was previously that you were on unpaid leave and had to just claim the loss of earnings from the court - (in Scotland I think its £32 for half a day or £64 for every full day you are used). We make a big thing of being a very civic minded institution - and fortunately the exec agreed. I did some digging before I talked to them and its something like 66% of all companies including SMEs and 80% of companies with 250 staff or greater continue to pay their staff whilst on jury service. But agreed as a self employed person is sucks - especially if you can't book jobs in and then don't get used so can even claim the £60 odd per day.

Ooh this interesting to me I've just been called up as well.

But the sheer bare faced cheek of them expecting you to lose out on your wages and then offer some paltry loss of earnings beggars belief. I’m astonished people actually do it. Unless you get paid by your employer then obviously that’s a different story. They should pay your salary when you are called up at the very minimum, anything else is insulting.

While I have sympathy for loss of wages, I think this is one of the few civic duties we are expected to actually take time out of 'life' to undertake. Our society and justice system relies on it, we don't do it very often, and they are very sympathetic of self employed folk in my (limited) experience.

My employer pays people still, and it seems a majority of companies do. I *think* my self employment health insurance back in the day had Jury cover.

Middle_oab should have been there this week. However he phoned on Friday as instructed and was told not to attend as he was a student.

Forgot to say – I got where I work to change their policy when I got my letter. It was previously that you were on unpaid leave and had to just claim the loss of earnings from the court – (in Scotland I think its £32 for half a day or £64 for every full day you are used). We make a big thing of being a very civic minded institution – and fortunately the exec agreed. I did some digging before I talked to them and its something like 66% of all companies including SMEs and 80% of companies with 250 staff or greater continue to pay their staff whilst on jury service. But agreed as a self employed person is sucks – especially if you can’t book jobs in and then don’t get used so can even claim the £60 odd per day.

I'm not sure why any employer should pick up the bill for Jury service to be honest.

While I have sympathy for loss of wages, I think this is one of the few civic duties we are expected to actually take time out of ‘life’ to undertake. Our society and justice system relies on it, we don’t do it very often, and they are very sympathetic of self employed folk in my (limited) experience.

Ok, next time then I'll tell that to my mortgage provider, utility bills and council tax etc etc when they don't get paid. I'm sure they'd understand.....

Unfortunately the real world doesn't give a flying f***.

In contrast to most of the comments above, she could get a really nasty one like my missus did.
I never got any detail but it seemed to be someone who killed another family member, perhaps as a mercy killing, i don't know. But the problem seemed to be not so much did x kill y, but also was x justified in killing y.
My wife came home each day completely ****ed and took a few months to get over it. Very nasty.

Or you might get lucky and need a book.

I meant to add: mrs_oab did it. One day of waiting, waiting and waiting. One long morning of a case, where again she said the defence were ill-prepared and clearly trying a defence that was indefensible, and so at lunch the accused pleaded guilty. The jury waited a while as negotiations happened, then were dismissed.

While I have sympathy for loss of wages, I think this is one of the few civic duties we are expected to actually take time out of ‘life’ to undertake.

For those less civic minded, you can see how effectively forcing people to pay to be there, would perhaps cloud their objectivity regarding the justice system and their impartiallity towards the defendants?

Turns out that I would never have had to go because covid then hit and the world went bonkers.

I sort of hoped covid would have resulted in some modernisation of the jury involvement in trials. My GF was called up for a trial during lockdown - but she wouldn't have been in the court. For social distancing purposes the jury would be in a nearby theatre on a video link. (in practice although selected for the jury presumably the case was resolved without being heard so she didnt even got to the the theatre)

It struck me that when I was on my case we were tied up from monday to Friday but usually only in the court for half a day at a time and only hearing the case for a few minutes a day. I'd guess all in we were present in the actual courtroom for about 45 minutes. Why did we have to be there at al if you can video it?

I can't think of a good reason why the jury can't be selected and sworn in as usual... then go home. The trial proceedings are filmed. At the end the jury comes back and watches the film. Watch it twice if they like - make sure they absolutely understand whats going on. At present you're making decisions based on un-noted recollections of something you say days, weeks, maybe months ago.

While the jury's role is important in the final decision they dont participate during the trial - its not an interactive role - I don't think if I'd put my hand up and said 'Actually judge I've got a few questions of my own I want to ask the witness' it would have gone down well 🙂

Ok, next time then I’ll tell that to my mortgage provider, utility bills and council tax etc etc when they don’t get paid. I’m sure they’d understand

agreed, I’m all for civic duty but not at the expense of me falling massively into debt through no fault of my own. I’m sure my employer would pay, but how does a self employed person on a longish case get by?

Are the summons letters recorded. I’ve never been summoned (touch wood) but at same time I never bother opening most of my unsolicited mail, it just goes in the bin. Unless it’s clearly marked by someone like the dvla, if I’m not expecting it I just treat it as junk

Its fair to suggest we should be civic minded and do our bit, but we should also expect to be treated efficiently, not have our time wasted and be compensated for our loss.

Given just about everyone's experience I would be looking to be excused as fast as possible.

Just pray she don't get allocated to a complex fraud trial that's going to take six weeks.

But the sheer bare faced cheek of them expecting you to lose out on your wages and then offer some paltry loss of earnings beggars belief. I’m astonished people actually do it. Unless you get paid by your employer then obviously that’s a different story. They should pay your salary when you are called up at the very minimum, anything else is insulting.

+1

Alright for employed folk. Absolute piss take for self employed. Day rate or nothing

Its fair to suggest we should be civic minded and do our bit, but we should also expect to be treated efficiently, not have our time wasted and be compensated for our loss.

Agreed. Add to that the jury attendant should treat the jury with respect and not be on a complete bell end power trip..... One of the other guys on my jury got into a propper barney with ours .... He was a bellend though and complaints were lodged.

So if you don't want to go, can you just turn up looking like a nutter and get sent home right away.

Alright for employed folk. Absolute piss take for self employed. Day rate or nothing

Insurance like this might help. Could cost you £33/m membership though.

I've been selected too.
Don't want to do it, will be paid by work for max 2 weeks, if it ran on longer I'd lose out a lot. The allowance is a pittance.
And don't get me started on the food allowance, isn't it about £7 a day or something insane, have they not tried shopping for food lately? (Convenience food/eating out I mean, I'm sure we could all find ways to do our own food for less than £7 a day at home)

On top of all that it's in a town that I loathe nearly as much as London!

Regarding books, would a tablet with Kindle be OK or do they get funny about such modern tech?
I guess I could handle the waiting around with a few good books and STW for company!

Can you claim hardship as a reason not to go?

Although after 10 days you can claim around 130/day. If you aren’t paying tax on that then most folks would be ok, although high earners would still miss out.

the state prosecutors tend to be shocking quality I guess because they are poorly paid compared to defence people

Most defence is on state aid, paying a paltry fixed price which for many barristers and lawyers results in them earning less than minimum wage once their true numbers of hours worked / on preparation time is factored in. Commercial law is far more rewarded, as a result the backlog and to some extent quality of those at the criminal bar is badly compromised. Sure, there will always be athe outlier 'celebrity barrister' type - but they aren't defending shoplifters and drub addicts.

https://thesecretbarrister.com/frequently-asked-questions/

https://thesecretbarrister.com/2022/04/11/why-are-criminal-barristers-taking-part-in-an-unnecessary-and-irresponsible-strike/

https://www.barcouncil.org.uk/resource/government-paying-junior-barristers-less-than-national-minimum-wage.html

My experience was horrific but that was the case not the system.
Others who were on duty that week just sat reading books until lunch then they were sent home. The case I was only lasted 1.5 weeks and we found the person guilty in around 1 hour if deliberation.
I really hope she doesn't get something nasty as it still affects me now some 8 years later.

Did it about 5 years ago in Guildford for 2 weeks. Big employer and they agreed to continue to pay me. The only travel expenses they would pay were public transport, (not town centre parking) with receipts etc, no car mileage - there’s no direct public transport from where I lived to Guildford, so I ended up just driving to Park’n’Ride (free parking) and paying £2 bus fare. Seem to remember that supplied food was terrible so just went to M&S and bought sandwiches. First week, went in Monday, didn’t get selected for either of the trials so was sent home to come back the following week. Didn’t tell employer at time, just stayed at home! Back next Monday, got selected for a 4 day sexual assault trial to start the next day. Turns out it was a “she said, he said” kind of thing wrapped around a family feud. Jury couldn’t reach agreement or even majority so it went back for a re-trial. Lots of sitting around, so take a good book!

But the sheer bare faced cheek of them expecting you to lose out on your wages and then offer some paltry loss of earnings beggars belief. I’m astonished people actually do it. Unless you get paid by your employer then obviously that’s a different story. They should pay your salary when you are called up at the very minimum, anything else is insulting.

+1

Expecting people to make a financial loss 'helping' the state is hardly going to ensure goodwill. They should at least pay the average full time wage rather than the pittance they offer.

But then the barristers are also paid an absolute pittance by the state as well..

The only travel expenses they would pay were public transport, (not town centre parking) with receipts etc, no car mileage – there’s no direct public transport from where I lived to Guildford, so I ended up just driving to Park’n’Ride (free parking) and paying £2 bus fare.

go take that to the "car brain" thread, show how the progressive and forward thinking court system assumes everyone is easily able to get to the centre of their nearest city by public transport for 9am.

Can you claim hardship as a reason not to go?

Yes. I emailed them and said I couldn't afford to lose out on my wages and to live on what might be £33 ish (I think) a day (subject to the time you spend there) for two weeks. I said I wasn't prepared to endure financial hardship to do jury service and cannot be expected to do so. There was no resistance to this, just an email back confirming I'd been excused. Doubt I'll get another call up but if I do I'll say the same thing again and won't be doing it.

The thing is you don't know what you can claim until you do it so its a complete unknown and its not as if you can plan for the potential £ losses.
Like I said, I'm amazed people swallow this crap and willingly go along and do it. I guess some people want to do it and would probably even pay for the privilege. Personally I'd rather sh*t in my hands and clap. Got better things to do with my time.

Lots of waiting around, cancellations, poor administration, time wasting and confusion

This

We had a trial, sat through the entire case an were in deliberation on verdict.

Mistrial declared after one jury hadn't locked his latop away as instructed. Same guy who had been telling the rest of us how it all worked, prize bellend

Doubt I’ll get another call up but if I do I’ll say the same thing again and won’t be doing it.

If my experience is anything to go by you can defer once but not a second time. I think it might depend on whether you were actually excused or whether it was a deferment.
The reasons accepted to be excused are limited, and financial hardship doesn’t seem to be one of the options

https://www.gov.uk/jury-service/delaying-or-being-excused-from-jury-service

Regarding books, would a tablet with Kindle be OK or do they get funny about such modern tech?
I guess I could handle the waiting around with a few good books and STW for company!

As I mentioned above both courts I did JS I took my laptop, ipad and kindle and mainly just worked.

My employer covered me but only guaranteed for 2 weeks so I was worried about getting a long case.  Loss of earnings would nowhere near have covered my outgoings.  People in the waiting room were split into 2 camps, those seeing out the wait in the hope they got sent home early, and those desperate to get involved (mainly people without any concerns about loss of earnings).

Interested to know what people who have any commitment that isn't work, during the day monday to friday?

If I had a scheduled surgery, or a booked holiday in march, and I got called up next week, would I be kept away from anything that had the potential to run longer than a month?

Flannol - not necessarily any better for the employee - many employers won’t pay you on jury duty and many treat you like you’ve been on holiday!  As a self employed person you can insure against loss of earnings for Jury Duty - do you think if the state offered to cover your true losses you would not have to pay more in NI to cover this?

macruissiken - I can see what you are suggesting, but those video links were two way.  The legal teams and judge can see if you are paying attention / nodding off etc.  it’s much easier to read the audience if you can see them in real time so know if you’ve made your point or need to ask the question again.  Whilst the jury can’t ask questions, they can alert the judge if they can’t hear or perhaps understand a witness.    Apparently all parties were keen to get people back in court rooms and believed it was fairer, perhaps seeing the accused in the flesh helps you believe their defence or it’s more obvious if the witness is constantly looking to the accused or public gallery for confirmation what to say, or the judge / lawyers / jury minders get a better idea if the jury is taking it seriously.

funkydunk - unlikely that the defence barrister would be getting paid better than the prosecutor.  They did probably see the file before they got to the court room though whereas prosecutors often just get handed the file on the day and left to make the best of it.  Remember though that the state has effectively infinitely more resources than any individual so if they are turning up ill prepared that is a choice made by a politician somewhere to prioritize something else.

I did it about 10 years ago at Crown Court. Jury were kept in a separate part of the building to everyone else. Own canteen etc.

I took my work laptop and phone and did some work when waiting to be selected. Seemed fair enough as work paid me my full time wage.

Lots of waiting and getting bored. Could go out for lunch and claim it back if you wanted to. Seemed a reasonable amount back then, would get you a meal deal easily.

Had two interesting cases, one drugs and one ABH.

Organisation was a bit poor but people working there were nice enough.

Razorazzo - electronics are fine.  Wifi may be dodgy if at all. Obviously not for use during the evidence or deliberations but lunch/waiting etc.

ajw - they will take into account stuff you have arranged especially if you back it up with evidence (and it was arranged before they contacted you), but if they “excuse” you will usually move the date/add you to top of the next set to be called rather than let you off completely.  Ultimately a judge can decide if you merit excusal (or if you would be in contempt to fail to serve on a jury).  Judges tolerance will be higher for say a medical reason than you having a hair appointment! (Re public transport - here the jury are not normally required till 10am - which allows the lawyers to lawyer or judge to deal with non jury business before the case starts).

Yeah good point. 10am start so got a ride in before heading into court. Helped that I worked in the same City as the court so they paid for my train fare for a week 😀

While I have sympathy for loss of wages, I think this is one of the few civic duties we are expected to actually take time out of ‘life’ to undertake. Our society and justice system relies on it, we don’t do it very often, and they are very sympathetic of self employed folk in my (limited) experience.

Actually I'm with moab, especially if they are sympathetic to self employed folks.  I've read the other comments on this and understand but I think I would still be willing to take the hit.  Civil society is a funny thing.  I'm also up for paying higher taxes for a better funded police and prosecution/state defence of course but that's another matter

Colleague of mine served on a fairly major one recently.

Organised crime case. The whole jury were excused from ever serving again afterwards went on for months...

I got the delights of Edinburgh Sheriff court last year, having managed to get an excusal the year before (there was a potential for the dates to overrun into a major event that I was deemed a key member of the team at), however I had no real reason to avoid it last year.

Scotland runs a lottery system for selecting jurors. You call the night before, and there's a recorded message to let you know what you need to do the next day. First day it was simply to call again the next evening. Second day it was to make sure you're available to take a call the following day. I then got a call before lunch to say I was in the lottery for the following day, and if I didn't receive another call before 4PM, to call as normal in the evening again. I got the call just after 4, saying I had to be in court the next morning.
Then there is a final selection done on the morning you attend. Here they call 20 jurors, 5 of which are reserve. They read out the charge, and ask if anybody has any reason that would prevent them from being an impartial juror, to step outside and give their reason.
Despite a stampede out the door, only two got excused.

Then once in court, the Sherriff asked if anybody had a reason that would cause them extreme inconvenience or hardship to sit on the trial. She was very clear it had to be an extreme reason. Just because it might cost you some lost income, or inconvenience you having to get into town everyday was not a valid reason, but if you were a carer to someone, or lived a long way from town, she would consider excusing you, but also mentioned you should have requested an excusal on those grounds before even turning up.

Other than the amount of time spent sitting around waiting to go in to court, I found it quite interesting. At the end of the case, the Sherriff did explain the reasons behind some of the delays.

The whole case gave an insight in to a section of society that is just f****d up.
Prosecution I think was just fresh out of uni, and done more to help the defence than they did the prosecution.
The 'victim' was most definitely on drugs when giving evidence, and contradicted their written statement multiple times.
One of the prosecution witnesses done more to help the defence than the prosecution.
The accused was the only one who seemed to have their story straight.

Are the summons letters recorded. I’ve never been summoned (touch wood) but at same time I never bother opening most of my unsolicited mail, it just goes in the bin. Unless it’s clearly marked by someone like the dvla, if I’m not expecting it I just treat it as junk

If they are not, then I guess if you don’t want to do it, then you just ignore it. I’d be surprised if they had the resources to chase it up. I expect the threat of possible fines is enough for most “normal” people to be cajoled into turning up.
I suppose if you didn’t want to be involved in a certain case you could just say you know the defendant 😉

Prosecution I think was just fresh out of uni, and done more to help the defence than they did the prosecution.

wont have been “fresh” out of uni prosecuting a solemn case, but sounds like they did their job right - contrary to TV the prosecutors job is not to secure a conviction at all costs.

If they are not, then I guess if you don’t want to do it, then you just ignore it.

they are usually clearly marked as from the court so not easily ignored as junk mail.  If you “never received” it then I think you will likely end up on the list in the next cycle.

I’d be surprised if they had the resources to chase it up. I expect the threat of possible fines is enough for most “normal” people to be cajoled into turning up.

if you consistently “never receive” it you might find someone goes to the effort of following up.  It is probably not a requirement for service that it is sent recorded.  The list used is the full electoral register (updated annually?) so if you are ignoring multiple citations but renewing your electoral registration you may trigger the court admin staff to look further.  If you are John Smith from Massive Flats on Huge Rd then you might not be memorable enough to stand out.  If you are Rupert Parker-Jones from Luxury St your failure to respond multiple times might be more memorable!

I suppose if you didn’t want to be involved in a certain case you could just say you know the defendant 😉

That may not be a smart idea - the consequences of contempt are significant.  If for example you were a survivor of child abuse and it was a child abuse case I think most judges would have a sympathetic ear to any trauma it may cause you. Judges make examples of Jurors who play silly beggars to deter others.

If my experience is anything to go by you can defer once but not a second time.

I've deferred twice.

Once I was in Australia on long term work.

Second time I was in Angola on the dates. - she was quite insistent I couldn't defer a second time - I also think she didn't quite have a grasp of where Angola was - " we pay travel expenses you know" ...." Yes it's about 1500 quid for a flight home from here"

The third time I had no such reason so went......after about the third day I wished I was back in Africa. - other than that they summonsed me and my equal/cover at work to the same court on the same day.......(un) fortunately he won the lottery of not actually getting called up 🙁

I've only done jury service at coroners court but apart from being rather grim sounds like a lot better experience than any other court. In the end the whole thing was abandoned as the coroner got COVID midway & I got a few days of riding my motorbike in North Wales instead.

I was called a few years ago. If it is a case that is going to be a long one, they will ask if there are any reasons why you would be unable to sit beyond the normal period of jury service. For the first week, I wasn't selected for any trials, so turned up Monday to Wednesday, then was told to come back on the following Monday. At this point, I was selected for a trial. It was a pretty horrible case which lasted two weeks. As others have said, the organisation/admin wasn't great. However, the nature of the trial meant that the judge was very senior and experienced. He really impressed me in how he managed the trial and how he treated the jurors. He didn't fit the old buffer stereotype. It was interesting to be involved, but I wouldn't like to listen to the same type of evidence again.