Jury Duty

Following on from my last post ..... I thought I would write a little about my time on Jury Duty.

As I said in that last post I LOVED it. Beforehand, several people had said to me that they thought it was OK but there was a lot of sitting about and moments of boredom. Perhaps armed with that knowledge and having no expectation helped. I went armed with books and magazines to fill those "boring" moments.

When you get there you register in. Then you do wait around ..... that is possibly the worst bit .... but I even enjoyed this as it meant I could sit with a coffee, read a magazine or chat with fellow jurors who may or may not be on the same case as you ........ and just actually have some ME time .... honestly ..... that's how I kind of viewed it .... not at work .... not running around after children..... not at home thinking I should be doing housework ..... just a coffee and a magazine - HEAVEN !

After an hour or so on that first week they organised the cases and begin to call out names ..... this part could be frustrating for some, as you have turned up and sat around for an hour and if your name is not called you can then go home ....... OR you are asked to come back at 12ish as there may be an afternoon case. 

Again, I don't think I would have had a problem with that ..... I was in Luton .... I could have gone shopping or to the Uni Library (I was at Uni then so could have access to the library).

However, my name was called .... and 12 good men and true were ushered into our first case. 

I cannot go into the details of the case but it fascinated me .... and the whole process was great! We listened to case details for 3 days ...... (I have to add that I also love the start/breaks and finish times ..... nothing starts till 10am .... an hour for lunch ...... then finish at 4pm !) I went home each day at 4pm and felt really relaxed .... you DO concentrate .....  listen to the things that are "not" said and try to put yourself in that persons shoes BUT it was still so much less stressful than anything else I would normally have been doing.

After 3 days we adjourned to discuss the case and reach a verdict. 

NOW .... this will shock many of you who may know me BUT I was fairly quiet during the process. It was interesting to see different "characters" come out ... we had just been studying Belbin's theory (at Uni) around effective management and team roles..... and I was actually keeping myself busy identifying these roles whilst others were establishing their positions ..... geeky I know ..... but fun !!

We elected a chairperson (mainly through each of us giving a short introduction to ourselves and our job roles and experiences) - there were a couple of "loud" characters and when voting it was obvious that these 2 characters were definitely pushing to be chair BUT I think the rest of us could see a quieter but strong personality in an older gentleman (not that much older .... in his 50's) who seemed to have reached a level within his job that would prove to be effective in the role of Chair.

Then we began discussing the case ......... some people had already made up their mind and this was shown when the chair suggested an immediate initial vote ..... finding the chap guilty by 9 to 3. I was one of the 3 ..... I was not convinced by the evidence that he had committed the crime ..... there were too many gaps and even an opportunity for someone else to have done it ..... so, going by the evidence alone, I argued the case for him, along with the other 2. 

Our arguments must have been reasonably persuasive .... at the end of day 4 we had reached a swap ... in that there were 8 of us against 4 who still felt he was guilty. The judge called us back in to hear where we were and said he would be satisfied with a majority of 10 to 2 ..... so we went home to consider it all and to return in the morning. 

On our return I asked for a couple of "props" .... a lot was riding on whether a bag had been full or empty and whether or not that could be decided from a camera angle on a security dvd we had seen. These props duly arrived and the answer was fairly immediate ..... you could not tell if they were full, half full or even empty ........ 2 of the 4 agreed immediately that the evidence was not convincing enough to convict .... the other 2 were happy that, although we would go back to court stating not guilty ... they had done their bit. 

I was  pleased that the initial 3 minority voices had been able to give a reasoned argument to see that the evidence was not strong enough ..... I actually had a gut feeling that he may not be innocent .... but the evidence could not prove it and afterwards we were told he was a good worker, no complaints against him, a good family man and no previous record so his character leaned towards his innocence too.

Then we did a very quick afternoon trial .... delivered a verdict on that one fairly easily and went away for the weekend.

It is amazing to find that you build relationships very quickly when on a Jury ..... you are thrown in at the deep end and see a persons belief system and ideology in an intense situation (not allowed out of the room when discussing and no break .... even lunch is brought in for you !)

The second case the week after started out very similarly and we followed the same pattern of an initial vote based on what we had seen and heard .... 10 to 2 Not Guilty .... guess who was in the 2 !!!!

Once again ...we argued the case and presented our reasons for why we felt the way we did ...... after I gave my argument, I  had swayed 3 over to the Guilty side ... my partner in crime persuaded another 2 ..... leaving us at 7 to 5 thinking he was guilty. 

We left for the day and on our return the next morning .... one of the Jury members was in a dilemma, on leaving court last night she was in the bus queue as the defendant and his "gang"  had passed ..... she overheard something and although she would not say what it was... as our instructions are strictly to go with what was seen and heard in court ........ but she could not take back what she had heard, so changed her vote to guilty ..... that was quite powerful and, possibly NOT for the right reasons but 2 more were swayed, leaving it again at 10 to 2 Guilty ... 

This time though the judge wanted an 11 - 1 majority, so we had to return to the room and discuss for another couple of hours when finally one of the last 2 agreed that the likelihood of him committing the crime was high. 

On this case .... there was very little evidence either way .... it was a mugging and so much of it had to be based on eye witness accounts and character ..... to my mind, much harder.

I came away realising there is no black or white, right or wrong and how hard it must be in murder cases or high profile ones where your decisions could mean a life imprisonment or someone getting away with murder - literally ..... both my cases were fairly minor .... not to those involved I'm sure but minor in the bigger scale of things ...... and who knows if we did make the "right" decisions ..... 

BUT .... I would do it gain in a heartbeat ..... as I said in my last blog .... if it were a paid job I would apply ! 

Although I guess the novelty would wear off and you could actually become quite cynical .... hence the way it is done now, is probably the best possible way ...... just please let me get picked again .... SOON !