DOCSLIB.ORG

The Jury in a Criminal Trial

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Jury in a Criminal Trial If you have issues viewing or accessing this file contact us at NCJRS.gov. e,R~ S:-k-.- ~:2? ). NEW SOUTH WALES !IF-( ~~ LAW REFORM COMMISSION CRIMINAL PROCEDURE THE JURY IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL REPORT LRC48 1986 r t NEW SOUTH WALES LAW REFORM COMMISSION I I. i' t°g- Q9Q CRIMINAL PROCEDURE REPORT THE JURY IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL MARCH 1986 NCJRS LRC48 FEB 10 1988 ACQUI·SiTlQNS 108999 U.S. Department of Justi~e Nationattnstitute of Justice uced exactly as received from the This document has bee~ :eprod 't points of view or opinions stat~d erson or organization onglnatlng I. thors and do not necessanly fn this document are those of the ~u s of the National Institute of represent the official posItion or po ICle Justice. d this copyrighted material has been Permission to repro uce granted by forn Commj ssion Ne~JS~Q~llctt~b~W~aJL~e~s&-IT~.auw~BR£e~~m-~~~~ to the National Criminal Justice Reference SeNice (NCJRS). NCJRS system requires permis- Further reproduction outSide of the sion of the copyright owner. National Library of Australia Cataloguing-In-Publication entry NEW SOUTH WALES. Law Reform Commission. Criminal procedure report: The jury in a criminal trial. Bibliography. ISBN 0 7305 1546 X. 1. Jury-New South Wales. 2. Trial practice-New South Wales. 3. Trials-New South Wales. 4. Criminal procedure-New South Wales. 1. Title. II. Title: The jury In a criminal trial (Series: New South Wales. Law Reform Commission, L. R. C. 48). 345. 944'075 iii New South Wales Law Reform Commission To The Honourable T W Sheahan, BA, LLB, MP, Attorney General for New South Wales CRIMINAL PROCEDURE REPORT THE JURY IN A CRIMINAL TRIAL We make this Report under our reference from your predecessor, .,;" the Honourable F J Walker, gc, MP, to inquire into and review the law and practice relating to criminal procedure and, in particular, the practices and procedures relating to juries in criminal proceedings. Keith Mason gc Paul Byrne (Chairman of the Commission) (Commissioner in Charge) Greg James gc Her Honour Judge Jane Mathews (Part-time Commissioner) (Part-time Commissioner) The Honourable Mr Justice Adrian Roden (Part-time Commissioner) Ronald Sackville (Part-time Commissioner) March 1986 v Table of Contents Para Page Terms of Reference xiii Participants in this Report xv Summary of Recommendations xvii Preface xxxi t [ il { Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION I. Backgro~nd 1.1 1 A. The Terms of Reference 1. 1 1 B. The Jury in a Criminal Trial 1.4 2 I~ I~ C. The Commission's Empirical Research Program 1.9 3 II. Principles Underlying Our Work On the Jury System 1. 18 7 A. Seven Principles 1. 19 7 B. The Relationship of these Principles to the Jury System 1. 28 10 C. The Reason for Law Reform 1. 30 10 Footnotes 11 Chapter 2: THE JURY IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM I. The Retention of the Jury 2.1 13 A. The Threshold Question 2.1 13 B. Alternatives to the Jury 2. 6 16 C. Subsidiary Questions 2.8 17 n. The Use of the Jury 2. 9 17 A. The Incidence of Jury Trials 2. 9 17 B. Serious Criminal Cases 2.11 19 C. Trial by Jury in Cases where Jurisdiction is Optional 2.15 20 D. The Size of the Jury 2.22 22 Footnotes 22 vi Para Page Chapter 3: THE FORM OF OUR R.ECOMMENDATIONS 1. The Goals to be Achieved 3. 1 25 A. Ensuring a Representative Jury: Chapter Four 3.2 25 B. Protecting the Jury: Chapter Five 3.3 25 C. Making the Jury's Task Easier: Chapter Six 3.4 25 D. Reducing Bias and Prejudice: Chapter Seven 3.5 26 E. Promoting Satisfactory Verdicts: Chapter Eight 3.6 26 F. Requiring the Verdict to be Unanimous Chapter Nine 3.7 26 G. Saving Time and Money: Chapter Ten 3.8 26 H. Disclosing Jury Deliberations: Chapter Eleven 3. 9 26 II. Interdependence of Our Recommendations 3.10 26 III. Implementation o.f Our Recommendations 3.11 27 IV. Areas for Future Consideration 3. 14 27 Footnotes 28 Chapter 4: ENSURING A REPRESENTATIVE JURY 1. Introduction and Background 4.1 29 II. Compilation of Jury Rolls 4. 10 31 A. The Draft Jury Roll 4.10 31 B. Grounds for Deleting People from the Jury Roll 4. 15 33 IlI. Summoning a Jury 4. 41 44 A. Excusing People from Jury Service on a Particular Occasion 4.41 44 B. Jury Vetting 4.43 45 C. Personal Applications to the Judge 4.46 46 i! / l ,l t , vii "( \ ~ 1, # Para Page t D. Procedures to Exclude Bias in a f" 4.48 47 ,:1.' Particular Trial :{. IV. The Rights of Challenge 4. 49 47 l, ~ A. Challenge to the Array 4. 50 48 ~ £ B. Challenges for Cause 4. 52 48 ~ ,\ C. Peremptory Challenges 4. 57 50 J D. Judicial Discretion to Discharge f a Jury 4. 76 57 ~ ,{ ,to. E. Consent Challenges 4. 77 58 ~ ~ ~ Footnotes 58 Chapter 5: PROTECTING THE JURY l. Introduction 5.1 63 II. Specific Recommendations 5. 8 64 A. The Secrecy of the Jury Panel 5.8 64 B. Reference to Individual Jurors in Court 5. 9 65 C. Information about Prospective Jurors 5.11 66 D. Reading the Jurors' Names 5.12 66 E. Identifying the Jurors in a Criminal Trial 5. 13 67 Footnotes 69 Chapter 6: MAKING THE JURY'S TASK EASIER I.. Introduction 6.1 71 II. Information Provided Before the Trial 6. 2 72 A. Improving the Notification of I Inclusion on a Draft Jury Roll 6.4 73 t B. Improving the Jury Summons 6. 8 75 ~. C. Providing an Explanatory Booklet 6. 13 77 ~ ~ D. Showing a Short Orientation Video Film 6.15 79 ~$ E. Estimating the Length of the Trial 6.16 79 ~ ~ ~ III. Information Provided at Trial 6. 17 80 ~ A. Judge's Orientation Address to the Jury 6. 17 80 ~. B. The Juror's Oath or Affirmation 6.25 85 i ~ ~ ~ ~ I J viii Para Page IV. Presenting the Evidence, Arguments and Summing-up to the Jury 6.26 86 A. The Defence Opening 6.26 86 B. Introduction of Witnesses 6.27 86 C. Technical and SCientific Evidence 6. 28 87 D. Other Evidence 6. 29 88 E. Judge's Instructions to the Jury 6.30 88 F. Communicating with Juries 6.31 89 V. Materials to Assist the Jury 6. 32 89 A. The Documents in the Case 6.32 89 B. The Transcript 6.33 90 C. Written Directions of Law 6.36 92 D. Written Statements of Alternative Verdicts 6.37 92 E . Material Exhibits 6. 38 93 VI. •Jurors' CondItions of Service 6.39 93 A. Refreshment and menities 6.39 93 B. Jury Fees 6.40 94 C. Personal Injury Compensation 6.45 96 Footnotes 96 Chapter 7: REDUCING BiAS AND PREJUDICE I. Introduction 7.1 99 II. Pre-Trial Publicity 7.3 99 A. Tri:::I.l by Judge Alone 7.3 99 B. Additional Remedies 7.17 104 III. Procedures Before Empanelling the Jury 7.23 106 A. Identific3.tion of the Juror's Association with the Case 7. 23 106 B. The Identification of Specific Sources of Bias 7.29 109 ix Para Page IV. Prejudice During the Trial 7.30 109 A. Determining the Real Influence of Prejudicial Publicity 7.31 110 B. Continuation of the Trial in Appropriate Cases 7.32 111 C. The Role of the Sheriff's Officers 7.33 lJ.2 D. Allowing the Jury to Separate 7.37 113 V. Procedures After Trial 7.42 114 Footnotes 116 Chapter 8: PROMOTING SATISFACTORY VERDICTS 1. Introduction 8.1 119 II. Deliberations 8.3 119 A. Separate Deliberations in Joint Trials 8.3 119 B. Length of Deliberation: A Minimum 8.4 120 C. Length of Deliberation: A Maximum 8.6 121 III. The Verdict of the Jury 8. 7 122 A. Delivery of the Verdict 8. 7 122 B. The Recommendation for Mercy 8.13 124 I C. Clarifying the Factual Basis of the I Jmy's Verdict 8. 16 125 ~ IV. Directed Verdicts 8. 21 127 A. Directed Verdicts of Acquittal 8.21 127 I[ I B. Directions to Convict 8. 22 127 " ~ f ~, , ~ . <, ; x Para Page V. The Jury in Complex Cases 8.24 129 A. Evidence of a Complex. SCientific or Technical Nature 8. 24 129 B. The Presentation of Complex Information 8.33 132 C. The Use of Specially Qualified Jurors 8. 34 133 Footnotes 135 Chapter 9: REQUIRING THE VERDICT TO BE UNANIMOUS 1. The Unanimity Requirement 9.1 139 A. The Origins and Effect of the Common Law Rule of Unanimity 9.2 139 B. Statutory Abrogation of the Unanimity Rule Elsewhere 9.12 143 C. The Arguments Advanced Against the Unanimity Rule 9. 14 143 D. Reasons for Retaining the Unanimity Rule 9. 33 150 II. Majority Verdicts 9. 36 151 A. The Disadvantages of Majority Verdicts 9. 36 151 B. The Views of Mr Sackville and Mr Justice Roden 9. 49 155 III. The Direction to the Jury 9. 51 156 Footnotes 156 Chapter 10: SAVlNG TIME AND MONEY 1. Introduction 10. 1 161 II. Pre-Trial Hearings 10.6 162 III. Avoiding the Diminution of the Jury 10.12 166 A. Background 10.12 166 B. A System of Providing Additional Jurors 10.16 168 C. The Minimum Size of the Jury 10. 23 171 IV. Efficiency in Empanelment 10.29 172 A. Streamlining Procedures for Empanelling Juries 10.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Municipal Court Trial Procedures
    Municipal Court 4) The right to cross-examine witnesses Trial Procedures admitted during the trial must remain as who testify against you; If you choose to have the case tried before part of the court’s file; therefore, Trial Procedures: 5) The right to testify on your own a jury, you have the right to question jurors documents or photographs contained on a behalf; about their qualifications to hear your case. flash drive, cell phone, tablet, laptop or Roanoke Municipal Court of Record other media may not be admissible. 6) The right not to testify (Your refusal If you think that a juror will not be fair, Purpose to do so may not be held against you impartial, or unbiased, you may ask the After all testimony is concluded, both sides judge to excuse the juror. You are also can make a closing argument. This is your This pamphlet is designed to provide in determining your innocence or permitted to strike three members of the opportunity to summarize the evidence, basic information about criminal guilt.); and jury panel for any reason you choose, present your theory of the case, argue why proceedings in the Northeast municipal 7) You may call witnesses to testify on court. It is not a substitute for legal advice except a strike based solely upon race or the State has failed to meet its burden of your behalf at the trial, and have the gender. proof, and make other arguments allowed from an attorney. You are encouraged to court issue a subpoena (a court order) seek legal advice if you have questions As in all criminal trials, the trial begins by law.
    [Show full text]
  • Grand Jury Handbook-For Jurors
    Grand Jury Handbook From the Office of Your District Attorney Welcome to The Grand Jury Welcome. You have just assumed a most important role in the administration of justice in your community. Service on the Grand Jury is one way in which you, as a responsible citizen, can directly participate in government. The Grand Jury has the responsibility of safeguarding individuals from ungrounded prosecution while simultaneously protecting the public from crime and criminals. The purpose of this handbook is to help you meet these responsibilities, and be knowledgeable about your duties and limitations. Your service and Copyright April, 2004 acceptance of your duties as a serious commitment to the community is Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia greatly appreciated. Atlanta, Georgia 30303 This handbook was prepared by the staff of the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia and provided to you by your District Attorney’s All rights reserved office to help you fulfill your duties as a Grand Juror. It summarizes the history of the Grand Jury as well as the law and procedures governing the Grand Jury. This handbook will provide you with an overview of the duties, functions and limitations of the Grand Jury. However, the If you have a disability which requires printed materials in alternative formats, legal advice given to you by the court and by me and my assistants will please contact the Prosecuting Attorneys’ Council of Georgia at 404-969-4001. provide a more comprehensive explanation of all of your responsibilities. I sincerely hope you will find the opportunity to participate in the enforcement of the law an enlightening experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Improving Recidivism As a Performance Measure Ryan King Brian Elderbroom Washington State Offender Accountability Act of 1999
    Improving Recidivism as a Performance Measure Ryan King Brian Elderbroom Washington State Offender Accountability Act of 1999 Goal: “reduce the risk of reoffending by offenders in the community” Legislation calls for Department of Corrections to: • Classify supervised individuals based on risk of reoffending and severity of prior criminal offending • Shift resources toward higher-risk persons Washington Recidivism Rates Source: Washington State Institute for Public Policy Establishing Metrics for Success and Assessing Results Why measure correctional performance? • Understand the outcomes of funding and policy decisions • Assess the effectiveness of justice agencies at reducing reoffending • Provide the best return on taxpayer investments Most Common Correctional Performance Measure: Recidivism The Good: • Correctional interventions (prison, community supervision) are supposed to reduce reoffending, so recidivism is a natural metric for success The Bad: • Frequently a single-indicator, which doesn’t allow for policy-relevant comparisons across groups • Irregularly collected • Presented absent context Four Steps to Make Recidivism a Meaningful Performance Measure Define Collect Analyze Disseminate Definition Use Multiple Measures of Success Desistance Severity Time to failure Behavior Change Time to Failure (Delaware) Percent Rearrested 2008 2009 2010 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 6 12 18 24 36 Months from prison release Collection Develop Protocols to Ensure Data Are Consistent, Accurate, and Timely Assign unique identifiers Develop long-term records Collect contextual information Update change in status Photo: Flickr/Kevin Dl Breaking Recidivism Down by Policy- Relevant Factors (Colorado) 3-year return to prison rates for 2010 release cohort Analysis Account for Underlying Composition of the Prison Population Photo: Flickr/Thomas Hawk Photo: Flickr/Thomas Hawk Remember that Washington Story from Earlier .
    [Show full text]
  • 249 Subpart C—Director, Secretary of the Navy Council of Review Boards and President Naval Discharge Review Board; Re- Sponsib
    Department of the Navy, DoD § 724.302 § 724.223 NDRB support and aug- can presume the truth of such facts, mentation by regular and reserve unless there is a substantial credible activities. evidence to rebut this presumption; or (a) When an NDRB Panel travels for (2) If the discharge in lieu of court- the purpose of conducting hearings, it martial only required a valid preferral, shall normally select Navy or Marine the NDRB may presume that the signer Corps installations in the area visited either had personal knowledge of, or as review sites. had investigated the matters set forth, (b) The NDRB Traveling Board shall and that the charges were true in fact normally consist of members from the to the best of the signer’s knowledge NCPB and augmentees from regular and belief. 1 The weight to be given this and reserve Navy and Marine Corps presumption in determining whether sources, as required. the facts stated in the charge sheet are (c) Navy and Marine Corps activities true is a matter to be determined by in the geographical vicinity of selected the NDRB. To the extent that the dis- review sites shall provide administra- charge proceeding reflects an official tive support and augmentation to an determination that the facts stated in NDRB Panel during its visit where the charge sheet are true; that the ap- such assistance can be undertaken plicant/accused admitted the facts without interference with mission ac- stated in the charge sheet; or that the complishment. The NDRB shall coordi- applicant/accused admitted guilt of the nate requests for augmentees and ad- offense(s), then the presumption is ministrative support through Com- strengthened.
    [Show full text]
  • A Federal Criminal Case Timeline
    A Federal Criminal Case Timeline The following timeline is a very broad overview of the progress of a federal felony case. Many variables can change the speed or course of the case, including settlement negotiations and changes in law. This timeline, however, will hold true in the majority of federal felony cases in the Eastern District of Virginia. Initial appearance: Felony defendants are usually brought to federal court in the custody of federal agents. Usually, the charges against the defendant are in a criminal complaint. The criminal complaint is accompanied by an affidavit that summarizes the evidence against the defendant. At the defendant's first appearance, a defendant appears before a federal magistrate judge. This magistrate judge will preside over the first two or three appearances, but the case will ultimately be referred to a federal district court judge (more on district judges below). The prosecutor appearing for the government is called an "Assistant United States Attorney," or "AUSA." There are no District Attorney's or "DAs" in federal court. The public defender is often called the Assistant Federal Public Defender, or an "AFPD." When a defendant first appears before a magistrate judge, he or she is informed of certain constitutional rights, such as the right to remain silent. The defendant is then asked if her or she can afford counsel. If a defendant cannot afford to hire counsel, he or she is instructed to fill out a financial affidavit. This affidavit is then submitted to the magistrate judge, and, if the defendant qualifies, a public defender or CJA panel counsel is appointed.
    [Show full text]
  • PJAL Manual 11Th Edition a Compilation of the Laws Concerning the Authority and Responsibility of Parish Governing Authorities Updated Through The
    PJAL Manual 11th Edition A compilation of the laws concerning the authority and responsibility of parish Governing Authorities updated through the Regular Legislative Session of 2019 Police Jury Association of Louisiana Page | i Preface The Police Jury Manual is designed as a ready reference to the general Constitutional and statutory provisions on the powers, duties and responsibilities of police jurors/parish government officials. Its purpose is to bring together in a single volume legal provisions that are widely scattered throughout the Constitution and statutes. Every effort has been made to accurately summarize the general laws governing police juries/parish governments. The manual, however, is not to be used as a legal text or for the purpose of legal opinions. The state Constitution, the statutes and court decisions are the final authorities governing police jury/parish governing authority operations. Each reference in the manual includes the legal citation necessary to assist the reader in locating the precise wording of the law or the more detailed and technical provisions that may have been omitted. Legal provisions pertaining to police jury/parish governing authority powers in certain areas, such as taxing and borrowing authority, are numerous, complex and sometimes archaic, contradictory and vague. For this reason, it is very important that police juries/parish governments consult their legal advisors in all cases in which a question of law or legal interpretation is involved. The Police Jury Manual was first prepared and published in 1960 by the Public Affairs Research Council (PAR) at the request of the Police Jury Association of Louisiana. This completely revised and updated eleventh edition was revised by the Police Jury Association staff.
    [Show full text]
  • Episode Fourteen: Legal Process Hello, and Welcome to the Death
    Episode Fourteen: Legal Process Hello, and welcome to the Death Penalty Information Center’s podcast exploring issues related to capital punishment. In this edition, we will discuss the legal process in death penalty trials and appeals. How is a death penalty trial different from other trials? There are several differences between death penalty trials and traditional criminal proceedings. In most criminal cases, there is a single trial in which the jury determines whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty. If the jury returns a verdict of guilty, the judge then determines the sentence. However, death penalty cases are divided into two separate trials. In the first trial, juries weigh the evidence of the crime to determine guilt or innocence. If the jury decides that the defendant is guilty, there is a second trial to determine the sentence. At the sentencing phase of the trial, jurors usually have only two options: life in prison without the possibility of parole, or a death sentence. During this sentencing trial, juries are asked to weigh aggravating factors presented by the prosecution against mitigating factors presented by the defense. How is a jury chosen for a death penalty trial? Like all criminal cases, the jury in a death penalty trial is chosen from a pool of potential jurors through a process called voir dire. The legal counsel for both the prosecution and defense have an opportunity to submit questions to determine any possible bias in the case. However, because the jury determines the sentence in capital trials, those juries must also be “death qualified,” that is, able to impose the death penalty in at least some cases.
    [Show full text]
  • Confession Admissibility Issues
    John E. Reid and Associates, Inc. Established 1947 209 W. Jackson Blvd., Suite 400 312-583- 0700 Chicago, Illinois 60606 800-255-5747 www.reid.com Fax 312-583-0701 Confession Admissibility Issues In the past several years the courts have become more concerned about the issue of false confessions. While the incidence of documented false confessions is rare, more and more jurisdictions are suggesting, if not requiring, interrogators to electronically record interviews and interrogations. With that in mind the courts are carefully examining the interrogator’s behavior and assessing the impact of that behavior on the voluntariness of the confession. The following represents a few court decisions regarding unacceptable interrogator behavior. California Court of Appeal Finds Confession Involuntary In the case of People v. Fuentes July, 2006 the Court of Appeal, Second District, California found the defendant's confession to be inadmissible because improper promises and threats were made during the interview, both express and implied, which rendered the confession involuntary as the product of coercive police activity. From the Appeal Court's decision: "In making this argument, defendant focuses on exhortations that even good people can do bad things while intoxicated and that defendant's not being in his “right state of mind” when the incident happened would “help” him. In addition, defendant was told that not confronting the situation would be “worse” for him, if defendant lied the case would go “very, very bad” for him, and if defendant kept quiet he could be charged “for something more serious, very ugly.” Conversely, if a person tells the truth “it goes much better for them” and “the charges are lowered - a little.” Finally, at least one and one-half hours after the interview started, defendant was given the alternative of spending either “the rest of [his] life” or “five or six years” in jail.
    [Show full text]
  • The Myth of the Presumption of Innocence
    Texas Law Review See Also Volume 94 Response The Myth of the Presumption of Innocence Brandon L. Garrett* I. Introduction Do we have a presumption of innocence in this country? Of course we do. After all, we instruct criminal juries on it, often during jury selection, and then at the outset of the case and during final instructions before deliberations. Take this example, delivered by a judge at a criminal trial in Illinois: "Under the law, the Defendant is presumed to be innocent of the charges against him. This presumption remains with the Defendant throughout the case and is not overcome until in your deliberations you are convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant is guilty."' Perhaps the presumption also reflects something more even, a larger commitment enshrined in a range of due process and other constitutional rulings designed to protect against wrongful convictions. The defense lawyer in the same trial quoted above said in his closings: [A]s [the defendant] sits here right now, he is presumed innocent of these charges. That is the corner stone of our system of justice. The best system in the world. That is a presumption that remains with him unless and until the State can prove him guilty beyond2 a reasonable doubt. That's the lynchpin in the system ofjustice. Our constitutional criminal procedure is animated by that commitment, * Justice Thurgood Marshall Distinguished Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law. 1. Transcript of Record at 13, People v. Gonzalez, No. 94 CF 1365 (Ill.Cir. Ct. June 12, 1995). 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Squatting – the Real Story
    Squatters are usually portrayed as worthless scroungers hell-bent on disrupting society. Here at last is the inside story of the 250,000 people from all walks of life who have squatted in Britain over the past 12 years. The country is riddled with empty houses and there are thousands of homeless people. When squatters logically put the two together the result can be electrifying, amazing and occasionally disastrous. SQUATTING the real story is a unique and diverse account the real story of squatting. Written and produced by squatters, it covers all aspects of the subject: • The history of squatting • Famous squats • The politics of squatting • Squatting as a cultural challenge • The facts behind the myths • Squatting around the world and much, much more. Contains over 500 photographs plus illustrations, cartoons, poems, songs and 4 pages of posters and murals in colour. Squatting: a revolutionary force or just a bunch of hooligans doing their own thing? Read this book for the real story. Paperback £4.90 ISBN 0 9507259 1 9 Hardback £11.50 ISBN 0 9507259 0 0 i Electronic version (not revised or updated) of original 1980 edition in portable document format (pdf), 2005 Produced and distributed by Nick Wates Associates Community planning specialists 7 Tackleway Hastings TN34 3DE United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0)1424 447888 Fax: +44 (0)1424 441514 Email: [email protected] Web: www.nickwates.co.uk Digital layout by Mae Wates and Graphic Ideas the real story First published in December 1980 written by Nick Anning by Bay Leaf Books, PO Box 107, London E14 7HW Celia Brown Set in Century by Pat Sampson Piers Corbyn Andrew Friend Cover photo by Union Place Collective Mark Gimson Printed by Blackrose Press, 30 Clerkenwell Close, London EC1R 0AT (tel: 01 251 3043) Andrew Ingham Pat Moan Cover & colour printing by Morning Litho Printers Ltd.
    [Show full text]
  • VICTORIA LAW FOUNDATION LAW ORATION Banco Court, Supreme
    VICTORIA LAW FOUNDATION LAW ORATION Banco Court, Supreme Court of Victoria —21 July 2016 OF MOZART, MODERN DRAFTING AND THE CRIMINAL LAWYERS’ LAMENT Justice Mark Weinberg1 1 May I begin by thanking the Victoria Law Foundation for having organised this evening’s event. It is an honour to have been invited to speak to you tonight. I am, of course, conscious of the fact that among previous presenters in this series have been a number of great legal luminaries. 2 I have no doubt that some of you have come here this evening for one reason only. That is to see how, if at all, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, perhaps the greatest musical genius of all time, can legitimately be linked to a subject as soporific as modern drafting, still less to a subject as parochial as the ongoing grievances of the criminal bar. 3 There will be cynics among you who believe that I have included Mozart in the title of this paper simply to bolster the attendance tonight. As I hope to demonstrate, you are mistaken. You will have to wait in order to find out why. 4 As the Munchkins said to Dorothy, ‘It is always best to start at the beginning’. In my case, that was as a law student, almost exactly 50 years ago. It was then, under the expert guidance of a great teacher, Professor Louis Waller, that I first came across the tragic tale of Messrs Dudley and Stephens, and the events surrounding the shipwreck of the yacht Mignonette. Since that time, I have been both intrigued and fascinated by the criminal law.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of the Special (Struck) Jury in the United States and Its Relation to Voir Dire Practices, the Reasonable Cross-Sect
    William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal Volume 6 (1997-1998) Issue 3 Article 2 May 1998 The History of the Special (Struck) Jury in the United States and Its Relation to Voir Dire Practices, the Reasonable Cross-Section Requirement, and Peremptory Challenges James Oldham Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj Part of the Criminal Procedure Commons Repository Citation James Oldham, The History of the Special (Struck) Jury in the United States and Its Relation to Voir Dire Practices, the Reasonable Cross-Section Requirement, and Peremptory Challenges, 6 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 623 (1998), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj/vol6/iss3/2 Copyright c 1998 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmborj WILLIAM AND MARY BILL OF RIGHTS JOURNAL VOLUME 6 SUMMER 1998 ISSUE 3 THE HISTORY OF THE SPECIAL (STRUCK) JURY IN THE UNITED STATES AND ITS RELATION TO VOIR DIRE PRACTICES, THE REASONABLE CROSS-SECTION REQUIREMENT, AND PEREMPTORY CHALLENGES James Oldham* In this Article, Professor Oldham provides a unique historical study of the special, or struck, jury in the United States. First, Professor Oldham discusses the influence of the 1730 English statute on eigh- teenth-century American law and reviews the procedures of several states in which the struck jury remains valid, in addition to the once- authorized procedures that states have since declared invalid. He also analyzes the relationship between the struck jury and peremptory chal- lenges. Second, Professor Oldham analyzes the special qualifications of the jurors comprising special juries in the context of the "blue ribbon," or "high-class," jury, the jury of experts, and the juries for property condemnation and diking district assessment disputes.
    [Show full text]