Jury Service

Mark2871

Does anybody know if there are rules regarding the conduct of jurors if they (the whole jury) have been dismissed (without inference of wrongdoing or inappropriate behaviour).

For instance. A ongoing case has had 3 jury's assigned to it through no misconduct of any jury member. The trial is being heard in a district court (large town). A fourth jury will be sworn in but without pre-qualifying any Jury member and with human nature being as it is, how can it be possible to guarantee jury members who have not be biased or influenced by the opinion of an already dismissed jury member.

The nub of it is are there rules regarding the discussion of the details of an ongoing trial by Jury members who have been dismissed or discharged from that trial? Do the same rules apply to ex Jury members as would to new jury members who are still involved in an ongoing trial?

Where a trial has had 3 sets of jurors and maybe 150 people who have heard the charges against the plaintiff, would it be fair to argue that is reasonable to request the moving of the trial to the Central Criminal Court in Dublin?

I understand these are just opinions. I have read a lot on this matter and would be interested not only in opinions but opinions that can point to trials that have already happened (not necessary though).

ResearchWill

There are no jury trials in District Court, there may be an argument to move the trial to Dublin Circuit Court. But as Circuits are much larger than a town or village and in fact cover in some cases a number of county's the chance of jury contamination is slim.

Also it would be risky of any jury member past or present to talk to person about an ongoing trial, especially present sitting members.

There was a recent trial in Cork where if I remember hung jury first trial, second trial collapsed and third trial got a verdict, but no issue of contamination between the jury's that I heard about.

Mark2871

Ok sorry I meant a circuit court. The Jury, or at least people who are present when the jury were being selected form a much larger group than the actual Jury. If the selected jury is dismissed 3 times this is 36 people and the jury pool to select this 36 people would be made up from 150 people (as far as I understand it).

All of these people, possible Jurors and actual Jurors, would hear the list of charges and know the identity of the plaintiff, even if they don't know the individual personally or in any other way.

Can the charges be read to possible jurors?

In a regional town with a population of 30,000, could it be argued that the pool of potential jurors could be compromised by the previous trial failures?

The rules for Jurors are not exactly rock solid and my understanding is, as with selection, the factors influencing Jury selection changes with the time (this is my understanding) and once this does not prejudice the case, a hard a fast rule for jury selection is not written in stone.

My question relates to previous jurors in an ongoing case, who have been dismissed through no wrongful action of their own, or any other juror. I understand the rules applying to current Jurors, but are previously dismissed/discharged Jurors, of an ongoing trial, bound by the same rules as sitting Jurors?

This question is asked in an effort to ensure a fair trial. If past jurors cross contaminate new Jurors with opinions, then this is not fair to the plaintiff. They may not know the plaintiff, they may not be predisposed to a prejudice against the Plaintiff as a result of their own personally held beliefs, but if they (the sitting Juror) have spoken to or heard of information "facts" relating to the case, that have resulted in an original jury being dismissed, "facts" that have been instructed by the Judge to be stricken from court notes, how does this influence the selection of the new Jury, or location where the case is being held?

SB2013

What would be the issue? Anything a jury heard would be in open court anyway wouldn't it?

Mark2871

The issue is where a piece of evidence is provided or that something was said in court to result in the jury being dismissed, something a witness or prosecutor would have said. In this event, even though the Jury had been dismissed on the basis that they heard something that they shouldn't or that something was said that would prejudice against the plaintiff, those Jurors are still aware of information that is untrue yet that as no-jurors could speak to other people about.

In this instance what protection is the plaintiff offered. Also the issue is where the court is closed to the public.

johnnyskeleton

If its an actual case, contact a solicitor.

If it is an academic exercise, read a book on criminal procedure about juries.

If it is idle curiosity, lets just say that there are safeguards in place to prevent most wrongs, but there is always a risk of human error in criminal trials and they are not perfect.

Mark2871

It's an academic exercise... however i am a bit puzzled, do you think i'd be asking the question if i'd managed to find an answer anywhere else?

And......Is that not the point of this forum... To get answers to questions your having trouble answering. I'm not being lazy, it's a genuine question as I cannot find anything on the matter "Conduct of dismissed/discharged Jurors while a trial is ongoing", if you are able to point me in the direction of specific reading I'd be happy to.

Can you put idle and curiosity in the same sentence? surely one contradicts the other. Orxymoronic? Ah just joshing.....

I'd really appreciate it if anybody can point me in the right direction of an article or info, or offer an opinion that can help.

Fangs........ I'm off to idle some more......toodle poops.....idle curiosity! why I oughta......

hullaballoo

Mark2871 wrote: »

It's an academic exercise... however i am a bit puzzled, do you think i'd be asking the question if i'd managed to find an answer anywhere else?

And......Is that not the point of this forum... To get answers to questions your having trouble answering. I'm not being lazy, it's a genuine question as I cannot find anything on the matter "Conduct of dismissed/discharged Jurors while a trial is ongoing", if you are able to point me in the direction of specific reading I'd be happy to.

Can you put idle and curiosity in the same sentence? surely one contradicts the other. Orxymoronic? Ah just joshing.....

I'd really appreciate it if anybody can point me in the right direction of an article or info, or offer an opinion that can help.

Fangs........ I'm off to idle some more......toodle poops.....idle curiosity! why I oughta......

Don't mind our resident snark. Only I may snark.


I think his point is that ordinarily, we don't do people's homework. However, your query doesn't seem to be homework so any reasonable answers would be great, thanks folks.

ResearchWill

Mark2871 wrote: »

It's an academic exercise... however i am a bit puzzled, do you think i'd be asking the question if i'd managed to find an answer anywhere else?

And......Is that not the point of this forum... To get answers to questions your having trouble answering. I'm not being lazy, it's a genuine question as I cannot find anything on the matter "Conduct of dismissed/discharged Jurors while a trial is ongoing", if you are able to point me in the direction of specific reading I'd be happy to.

Can you put idle and curiosity in the same sentence? surely one contradicts the other. Orxymoronic? Ah just joshing.....

I'd really appreciate it if anybody can point me in the right direction of an article or info, or offer an opinion that can help.

Fangs........ I'm off to idle some more......toodle poops.....idle curiosity! why I oughta......

The issue with your question is that, it would be impossible to happen. By that i mean the Jury pool would not be 150 people as there would not be 3 trials within the period of one jury pool. To try and explain.

The jury pool arrive on a monday, 12 are picked for a trial. That trial colapases due to no fault of anyone on the jury. That trial would not go ahead in that criminal sessions, it would be put back to the next. Even if it did go ahead that sessions it would be the next week or week after when a new jury pool would be in place. For example in Cork say there is a 4 week criminal sessions, then there would be 4 seperate jury pools each starting on the Monday. If a person is picked for a jury they of course will stay on that jury as long as the trial lasts.

If a trial colapased 2 or 3 times in the same week with the same Jury Panel then I think the Defence team would be kicking up a stink, I would even say if there was a second jury to be picked it should not come from the same panel. As I said any case i have seen colapase it has been adjourned to the next sessions, I would assume if it happened in Dublin it would see it going back a few weeks, to allow the DPP to decide what to do.

valleyoftheunos

ResearchWill wrote: »

The issue with your question is that, it would be impossible to happen. By that i mean the Jury pool would not be 150 people as there would not be 3 trials within the period of one jury pool. To try and explain.

The jury pool arrive on a monday, 12 are picked for a trial. That trial colapases due to no fault of anyone on the jury. That trial would not go ahead in that criminal sessions, it would be put back to the next. Even if it did go ahead that sessions it would be the next week or week after when a new jury pool would be in place. For example in Cork say there is a 4 week criminal sessions, then there would be 4 seperate jury pools each starting on the Monday. If a person is picked for a jury they of course will stay on that jury as long as the trial lasts.

If a trial colapased 2 or 3 times in the same week with the same Jury Panel then I think the Defence team would be kicking up a stink, I would even say if there was a second jury to be picked it should not come from the same panel. As I said any case i have seen colapase it has been adjourned to the next sessions, I would assume if it happened in Dublin it would see it going back a few weeks, to allow the DPP to decide what to do.

Is that specific to the Circuit Court? I ask because I remember in the Pavel Kalite Murder Case three or four years back a jury were selected on the Monday, dismissed on the Tuesday morning and a new jury selected on the Tuesday. I remember at the time thinking it had all happened rather quickly.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

ResearchWill

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

There would be no problem but it does not happen. There are other trials slated into start on the next day. I have never seen a collapsed trial going straight to another jury and trial. Usually it goes back. Also in cork and other circuit i have seen a jury panel is for one maybe 2 weeks then a new panel.

Mark2871

Thanks folks for providing some clarity, maybe I can be more specific so as to guide your answers more directly....

The question relates to a Jury being dismissed 3 times over a period of years. The Jury are picked from a different panel each time, understood. One part of question relates to the size of the town and the possibility of Jury contamination through.....idle gossip as opposed to idle curiosity.... and if anybody was familiar with cases where district court cases were moved to Dublin because of potential Jury prejudice.

I was also asking about a dismissed Jurors responsibility where a case is ongoing, over a prolonged period, as in years, and whether anybody was familiar with any material on Jurors responsibility re an ongoing case (dismissed or discharged Juror). Again it must be said that for this exercise none of the Jury members have been dismissed through any wrongdoing of any Juror, past or present.

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

valleyoftheunos

Mark2871 wrote: »

Thanks folks for providing some clarity, maybe I can be more specific so as to guide your answers more directly....

The question relates to a Jury being dismissed 3 times over a period of years. The Jury are picked from a different panel each time, understood. One part of question relates to the size of the town and the possibility of Jury contamination through.....idle gossip as opposed to idle curiosity.... and if anybody was familiar with cases where district court cases were moved to Dublin because of potential Jury prejudice.

I was also asking about a dismissed Jurors responsibility where a case is ongoing, over a prolonged period, as in years, and whether anybody was familiar with any material on Jurors responsibility re an ongoing case (dismissed or discharged Juror). Again it must be said that for this exercise none of the Jury members have been dismissed through any wrongdoing of any Juror, past or present.

If you look over the cases where trials could not go ahead because a jury might have been so prejudiced as to be unfair you'll see that the threshold is actually quite high. Having possibly heard some gossip in the past wouldn't do it. it might prevent a single juror from being selected but not a trial from going ahead.

As regards the duties of a juror during and after a trial I'm not sure, perhaps someone here who has served on a Jury or who practices in the criminal area of law might know.

johnnyskeleton

Mark2871 wrote: »

It's an academic exercise... however i am a bit puzzled, do you think i'd be asking the question if i'd managed to find an answer anywhere else?

What have you looked at so far? Have you read prof Walsh or omalleys books on the subject. Since you are talking about a plaintiff in a criminal case, district court juries and are unaware of the swearing in process I'm guessing not. I think you should read them.

Or go to your local circuit court and observe what happens.

Or bloody well look up jury and criminal trial in Wikipedia.

[QuoteCan you put idle and curiosity in the same sentence? surely one contradicts the other. Orxymoronic? Ah just joshing..... [/quote]

It is one thing for someone who has genuinely researched this issue to have a difficulty understanding it. It is another to simply lash out a half baked idea and expect other people to untangle the different strings. The former is active curiosity, the other is expecting someone else to do your thinking for you.

Mark2871

I have read articles within the jury's act and other constitutional documentation on this matter. I have also read some article published by professors and again I have failed to locate anything in relation to a jury members responsibilities when they have been dismissed/discharged and the trial tyne have been released from is ongoing.

This answer may require somebody with a legal background knowing a specific instance where a released Juror erred and that this err resulted in a,b or c.

on the moving of the trial I have come across this

A controversial issue I think is worth raising is where the jury should be empanelled from, the Capital, the local area where the crime was committed or an objective impartial place. In the DPP v Nally the accused was tried by the Central Criminal Court sitting in his home town. After a successful appeal that the learned trial judge erred in directing the jury to give only a guilty verdict of either of two offences a retrial was held in Dublin. Finbarr McAuley of the Law Reform recommended that “there are genuine concerns about the impartiality of a jury when a trial is held in the heart of a small close-knit community”.

Mark2871

Dude,

I've asked a 2 very specific questions, people ask questions to get answers, not to fuel smart arse douche bags to make snarky comments. Bully for you being the smartest bloke in Babylon........and you'd wonder why the world is like it is........your attitude is ****ed dude.....pointing people in the direction of books you haven't read or that you don't understand yourself because you can't answer the 2 questions I've asked is kinda pathetic. But you go ahead and keep that smug smile on your face that affirms how clever you are to yourself and how big of a wanker you are to everybody else. Dude.......seriously uncool......

Mark2871

If you feel you can actually answer either of the questions I've asked feel free to have a go and impress the bejaysus out of me with your cleverosity......