header-logo header-logo

22 May 2008 / Martin Rackstraw
Issue: 7322 / Categories: Features , Legal services , Procedure & practice , Profession
printer mail-detail

In the balance

Martin Rackstraw weighs up jury eligibility issues and the arguments for the removal of potential bias in juries

Recent government measures aimed at reforming criminal justice have the look of solutions searching for problems. None more so than the changes to the rules on jury eligibility brought into effect by s 321 and Sch 33 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) which removed the bar to police officers, prison officer, lawyers and others involved in the administration of justice from serving. At a stroke, certainty has been replaced by uncertainty, and the predictable flood of appeals has begun.

In R v Khan [2008] EWCA Crim 531, [2008] All ER (D) 212 (Mar), and in R v Alan I unreported October 2007 CA, the court has considered a series of appeals revolving around jury bias. These cases followed the House of Lords' judgment in the conjoined appeals in R v Adbroikof; R v Green; R v Williamson [2007] UKHL 37, [2007] All ER (D) 226 (Oct), which had attempted to clarify the

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

Anthony Collins—20 promotions

20 promotions mark major people investment at national law firm, Anthony Collins

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley—Elaine Whiteford

Sidley adds competition litigator Elaine Whiteford in London

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys—Claudina D’Costa

Charles Russell Speechlys welcomes Claudina D’Costa as Director of Client Development Marketing

NEWS
The 25th Pro Bono Week begins today until 6 November, with events hosted by law firms, chambers, law schools and charities across the UK
Pro bono is celebrating a silver anniversary, with initiatives putting businesses and students at the heart of access to justice
Choosing the wrong expert can cost a clinical negligence claimant more than their case
Judges risk weakening their own independence by staying silent over government reforms, a leading public lawyer argues
A discount on damages does not automatically mean an equivalent haircut for legal costs in military deafness claims
back-to-top-scroll