As Joshua Rozenberg commented in his Guardian article of 21 February 2013: ‘The jury in the Vicky Pryce trial did more than fail to reach a verdict after some 15 hours of deliberation. It asked a series of questions that must have damaged public confidence in the entire system of trial by jury.’
One of the jury’s controversial questions was: ‘Can a juror come to a verdict based on a reason that was not presented in court and has no facts or evidence to support it, either from the prosecution or defence?’ Rozenberg noted that this question was ‘so extraordinary that it suggested the jury had completely failed to understand what it was there for’. This was also the opinion of the prosecution barrister, who advised the judge that this jury should be discharged immediately.
Your organisation does not have access to this article.
Sign up today to give your students the edge they need to achieve their best grades with subject expertise
Subscribe
