The Jury System.

The jury system preceded the modern English system of courts of law. It can, in fact, be traced back in England to the time of the Anglo-Saxons. There was a custom in those days whereby a man accused of a crime would be acquitted if the necessary number of persons came forward and swore that they believed him to be innocent.

The function of a jury today is ordinarily to decide whether the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt. However, the criminal jury may be called upon to decide a preliminary issue, namely whether the person who is accused is mentally fit to plead to the charge.

One justification for retaining the use of a jury in a criminal trial is that the jury can act as a barrier between the citizen and the state, its power to acquit the accused giving it a means of dealing effectively with misuse of the power of the state so far as that particular accused is concerned.
Juries serve as a barometer of the prevailing ideas in the community.

A commonly held view is that a jury is composed of a cross-section of the community. All citizens over the age of 18 that pay taxes can be called to sit as jurors. This view differs from reality though. The result of the right to be excused and of certain of the categories of ineligibility, coupled with the jury selection system, is that a jury does not represent a true cross-section of the community. This can perhaps best be seen by considering the method by which juries are in fact selected in criminal cases. When the panel of prospective jurors has assembled in the courtroom and the accused has pleaded not guilty, the names of the prospective jurors are called out individually to give the accused the right to challenge them and the Crown the more limited right of standing them aside.

Although there are some who are called for jury service on several occasions within a comparatively short period it is not usual to find anyone who has served on more than two or three juries in a lifetime. Jurors, therefore, are unlikely to be familiar with court procedure (worse, they may have seen American television films which show a completely different procedure). There is no provision for the court procedure to be explained to them in advance, and what happens in practice is that it unfolds before them progressively. The jurors, who may well be unused to considering arguments extending over perhaps days, in some cases even longer, are not even provided with pen and paper and are not provided with a copy of the transcript of evidence. The judge and the barristers are provided with copies, but not the jury. They are to rely on their memories and their impressions.

2. Explain and give Russian equivalents for the following:

-to decide a preliminary issue;

-mentally fit;

to acquit;

-to plead to the charge;

-misuse of the power;

-the categories of ineligibility;

-a cross-section of the community;

-to stand sb aside;

-provision;

-the transcript of evidence.

III. 1. Are jurors part of the Russian court system? Make up three questions you’d like to get answers to about a jury in our country.

2. Read the text below and see if you can find the answers to your questions.

Дата добавления: 2015-11-14