Search results
Jun 30, 2020 · Is the threat to remove juries a danger to citizens' rights? In response to the recent suggestions of trial juries being removed in favour of lay magistrates, Kent Law School's Darren Weir said: ‘The right to trial by jury is once again under threat.
Jul 15, 2020 · Once the principle of removing juries has been conceded, it would be easy for the government to raise the threshold for cases that could be considered without a jury.
- Hannah Quirk
There could be some cases where a trial in front of a professional judge would be preferable to one in front of lay magistrates alone, but where the wait for a jury trial is not what the defendant or witnesses want.
Apr 5, 2000 · If home secretary Jack Straw gets his way, he argues, defendants will still have their jury trial, 'albeit a small jury of three magistrates'.But many would argue that it is hardly a jury...
Aug 17, 2023 · Here are some key arguments for and against trials by jury. 1. Pro: ensures representation. Having juries means that the “community is represented”, with members of any “race, religion ...
Jul 10, 2022 · Therefore, they should be removed. The abolishment of the jury would reduce costs and accelerate trials. If magistrates would have complete powers in criminal cases, the trust of the public in the achievement of a competent result would improve.
People also ask
Should trial juries be removed in favour of lay magistrates?
Should a jury be abolished?
Should magistrates be removed from criminal cases?
Is the right to trial by jury under threat?
What are some arguments for a trial by jury?
Should the jury system be rethought and developed?
Many of the interviewees pointed out that the lay magistracy makes decisions in groups of three, whereas District Judges, who also sit in magistrates’ courts, make decisions alone: “its’s so important that three people sit on a trial…that there’s a bench of three – and you’re from different backgrounds, different experiences and ...
