The summary sheet I used for the Unit 3 Controlled Assessment in the A.C.2.5 section that achieved me an A* (UMS 100).
Expertly written summary sheet for discussing the use of laypeople in criminal cases.
WARNING: you may be disqualified from the exam for plagiarism if you hand my work in as your...
A.C.2.5 - Discuss the use of lay people in criminal cases
➔ Laypeople are ordinary members of the public with no legal qualifications or professional
knowledge of law
➔ 2 key roles: juries or magistrates
Juries
★ Verdict decided by jury in Crown Court of 12 laypeople after hearing evidence and arguments
by prosecutions and defence
★ Then, retire to discuss and decide verdict in secret
★ Under Criminal Justice and and Courts Act 2015, offences for anyone to question the
jurors about verdict or how they reached it
★ Jurors selected randomly from electoral register, receive summons to attend court,
usually 2 weeks or longer if trial goes beyond
★ Juries Act 1974: CJA 2003
★ Eligible are over 18 to 75, and citizens UK, Irish Republic, British Commonwealth.
Reside in UK, Channel Islands or Isle of Man for 5 years
★ Disqualified those on bail, received prison sentence of 5 years, anyone received
shorter is disqualified for 10 years
★ Possibility to be excused as medical and other reasonable grounds (holiday paid for,
pregnancy)
+ Jury Equity, jury not bound by law and are free to decide a case based on what they
feel is fair or morally right, regardless what jury says
+ Kay Gilderdale 2010, attempted murder / euthanasia of critically ill daughter.
Administered drugs and she plead guilty to assisted suicide, CPS charged
her. But, the jury acquitted her.
+ Clive Ponting acted in public interest to reveal gov. Secrets
+ Bushells’ 1670
+ Justice is seen to be done → ordinary members of public decide outcome
+ Impartiality and a fair trial
+ Secrecy
+ Public Confidence and democracy
- Racial Bias
- Sander had racial bias concerns in the unjust verdict. Jurors made racist
remarks of an Asian man.
- Media influence
- R V Taylor and Taylor . High profile case made inaccurate stories - Fraud trials
- Cheryl Thomas on jurors’ understanding of technical language - Jury Tampering
- R V Twomey would cost £6 million to protect jury
- High acquittal rates
- Perverse decisions
- R V Randle and Pottle - found not guilty a it was 25 years later
- R V Kronlid - ignore unjust laws against facts of the case
- Secrecy
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller MystixHelped. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £3.99. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
