Jurors need not leave their box
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Jurors can still reach verdicts by a quick show of hands without even leaving the jury box, three appeal judges ruled yesterday.
Lawyers for Ellistone Rankine, appealing against a conviction for unlawful wounding, had argued that at his trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court, in north-east London, Judge Medawar had wrongly told jurors they could indicate their decision after conferring in court. But the Court of Appeal said the old practice of taking a verdict "in the box" had never been outlawed.
Whether it was wise to do so was another matter, the judges said, but Judge Medawar had made it clear that they could retire to the jury room if they wished. Mr Rankine was cleared on grounds of unsatisfactory identification evidence. Patricia Wynn Davies
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments