Jurors don't understand judge's directions, study finds
Less than a third of trial jurors fully understand a judge's legal directions, a ground-breaking study suggested today.
Jury members also looked on the internet for information about their case, despite being told not to by the judge, the research showed.
Other findings show that all-white juries do not discriminate against black defendants and juries convict more often than they acquit in rape cases, contrary to public perception.
The two-year study, led by Professor Cheryl Thomas of University College London, analysed 68,000 verdicts across Crown courts in England and Wales, and also staged simulated trials.
In relation to judge's directions - where a judge gives crucial guidance to jurors about what they have heard - the research team asked jurors at Winchester Crown Court to recall two key questions that the judge gave in a case where a defendant was charged with violence.
Only 31% of jurors accurately identified both questions, it was found.
A further 48% correctly identified one of the two questions, and a fifth did not correctly identify either question.
Researchers found a written summary of the judge's directions on the law for jurors improved their comprehension of the law.
Prof Thomas has recommended a pilot test of written juror guideline cards for a sample of courts to work out how they can be best introduced.
In 2008, the Lord Chief Justice suggested that courts might need to present more information visually to reflect greater use of technology like the internet.
The report, called Are Juries Fair?, also tested verdicts from all-white juries concerning white and black and Asian defendants.
It was found that verdicts at both courts showed no tendency for all-white juries to convict a black or Asian defendant more than a white person.
White defendants accused of racially motivated crimes were also not more likely to be acquitted by all-White juries than racially mixed panels.
More than a quarter (26%) of jurors saw internet reports of the trial, and 12% actively looked for information about their case, the study showed.
Jurors are directed by the judge at the start of a trial not to look for any information about the case themselves to minimise the risk of a miscarriage of justice.
Prof Thomas said some of the report's findings contradicted common perceptions about jury conviction rates - particularly in the case of rape trials.
"Contrary to popular belief and previous official reports, juries convict more often than they acquit in rape cases (55% conviction rate)," it said.
The report added: "While there is no doubt that the proportion of rape complaints to police that end in conviction is extremely low, it is also clear that this cannot be attributed to juries' failure to convict in rape cases."
Trials involving charges of making indecent photos of children had the highest conviction rates, at 89%, with threats to kill cases having the lowest, at 36%.
In response to the study, Justice Secretary Jack Straw said: "The jury system is working, and working well.
"The study's findings on the fairness of jury decisions, including for people from black and minority ethnic backgrounds, will help to maintain public confidence in juries and the jury system.
"But we cannot allow complacency about the justice system. We will carefully consider the recommendations for helping jurors do their job to the best of their ability."
Commenting on the findings, Lord Justice Thomas, Deputy Head of Criminal Justice, said: "Trial by jury is fundamental to the administration of justice, and confidence in the jury system is equally important."
He added: "One area of obvious and particular interest to the judiciary is the way in which the judge gives directions to a jury.
"The report recommends that work be undertaken by the judiciary in relation to ensuring the directions are readily understandable.
"Work has been under way in this important area for some time. For example, steps are being taken to ensure that more written material is available for juries. The Judicial Studies Board now recommends that written directions be given to juries in all but the most simple of cases and will consider, in detail, the recommendations made in the report.
"It must always be remembered that juries considering their verdict can ask the judge for clarification of any aspect of the case."
Is your name now 'banned' in Saudi Arabia?
Oscar Pistorius trial: Photographs of Paralympian splattered in blood shown in court
Seth Rogen compiles list of all the celebrities he’s got high with
Missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370: Satellite ‘pings sent five hours after contact was lost' the only clue in hunt for £160m plane
Missing Malaysia Airlines Flight MH370: New radar evidence suggests missing plane may have been hijacked
Katie Hopkins continues campaign to become Britain's most hated talking head with poorly timed Bob Crow tweet
No EU referendum under Labour: Ed Miliband to reveal that vote on membership is ‘unlikely’ in next Parliament if party wins power
Grace Dent: Who cares if she spells it Barraco Barner? Gemma Worrall is more employable than some bookish arts graduate
Europeans have ‘got whiter’ due to natural selection in past 5,000 years, scientists say
Fracking is turning the US into a bigger oil producer than Saudi Arabia
The rise of Ukip: Study warns Labour that Eurosceptic party's electoral base now 'more working class than any of the main parties'
- 1 Is your name now 'banned' in Saudi Arabia?
- 2 Best films on Netflix: 32 movies that will put an end to your scrolling
- 3 Saving a crushed egg with tape and glue: Why you should care about the kakapo
- 4 Istanbul protesters take 'Ellen selfie' from the back of a police van
- 5 Lady Gaga has struggled with eating disorders in the past, so it's indefensible that she's glamourising bulimia in her SXSW set