Letter: The jury is out on trial by jury
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.Sir: After his acquittal on theft and conspiracy charges, following one of the longest periods of jury deliberation on record, George Walker said: 'I think it would be madness to lose the jury system' ('Walker may sue for damages', 25 October).
At the press conference after his trial, Mr Walker commented that he was sure the jury had not properly understood much of the highly detailed legal argument. 'I didn't understand a lot of it, so I can't see how they could.'
Jury equity had, it appeared, rejected the prosecution's case for possibly contentious reasons: that is was prolix and incomprehensible rather than just wrong.
Any democratic merit being accorded to the jury system by this decision was, however, being counterbalanced by another court judgment that you report ('Retrial order in 'Ouija case' ', 25 October). The Court of Appeal ordered a retrial of a man convicted of double murder because four jurors, in a 'drunken experiment', tried to contact the murder victims in a seance.
Many agree with Lord Devlin's praise of the jury, that is it 'the lamp that shows that freedom lives'. The trouble, however, is that very little is really known about the jury's decision-making process because it is illegal for jurors to discuss their experiences with researchers.
Juries, it should not be forgotten, convicted the defendants in all the appalling miscarriages of justice that are now matters of record. The Birmingham Six, the Guildford Four, the Tottenham Three, the Cardiff Three, Judith Ward, Stefan Kiszko, et al. The jury is only as good as the system of which it is a part.
If the rules on researching jury deliberations are relaxed, as the Royal Commission recommended, I suspect the resultant research findings would be alarming to many.
Yours faithfully, Gary Slapper The Law School Staffordshire University Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire 25 October
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments