Add Your Idea

Abolish trial by jury

1 Comment 31st July 2010

Trial by jury should be abolished because it is very wasteful. I was called on jury service and spent, like many others, the whole of the first week waiting to be called. Finally I was called on the second or third day of the following week. For those who earn their living by selling their time, the days of sitting idle waiting to be called for a few days of actual jury service is unfair.

To the argument that it produces fairer results, I doubt it based on my experience. We could not decide on a verdict despite spending a day deliberating while the judge, the court officials, the solicitors, etc waited idly for our verdict. The verdict could have gone either way depending on the composition of the jurors. The judge, without a jury, would probably have reached just as fair a verdict at hugely less cost.

Why does this matter?

It is a huge waste of time of people who could use their time productively elsewhere and of money for the whole judicial system.

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)

Highlighted posts


One Response to Abolish trial by jury

  1. anne says:

    I recently was on jury service and sat on two trails at the Old Bailey the 1st trail was the defendant intending to supply cocaine.
    He was found with 17 packets of cocaine and £350 in the same bag and when we were sent to deliberate the case 5 of the jurors told us they had used cocaine and said because each packet had different amounts in them he was not a dealer and it would be perfectly normal to take 17 packets of cocaine over the weekend. I have never taken illegal drugs and me and 3 other members of the jury thought he was guilty but, because we had people who used cocaine on our jury they thought they were more knowledgeable than us, the police and the CPS.
    The second case was a rapist of 13 year old girls, this person had pleaded guilty to the rape of his niece many years ago (even though he said he was now innocent when he took the stand).
    There were so many incidents which to me he was obviously guilty, we then went to deliberate and all twelve jurors found him guilty of two indictments and 10 found him guilty of one indictment, we then went back into court to give our verdict and when we retired back in the jury room two of the jurors started to cry about finding him guilty which I found unbelievable they did not cry for the children he had rape but for him because these rapes happened many years ago. Again unbelievable !!!

    I feel there should not be a jury deciding on any case as they compare their lifestyles to the defendant and some people have no backbone in sending someone to justice.

Comment on this idea

Good idea? Bad idea? Let us know your thoughts.


Back to top
Add Your Idea