Alyce
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2012
- Messages
- 13,161
- Reaction score
- 52,990
5 | T20237104 | constance marten mark alton gordon | |||
|
www.thelawpages.com
5 | T20237104 | constance marten mark alton gordon | |||
|
If it's one charge that has been under discussion for most of this time it could be the cruelty charge, for which a guilty verdict in respect of a given defendant requires the jury to be sure that they neglected or exposed Victoria in a way that was likely to cause unnecessary suffering or injury.IMO, most of the charges are easy to decide on. I think they might just be discussing the one charge about "allowing or causing the death of a child". I'm not sure this is cut and dried. JMO etc...
Normally juries don't initiate telling the judge they're struggling to agree, but this is a highly unusual jury.Has the judge said he’s prepared to accept a majority verdict yet? I don’t think so, but may have missed it. If he hasn’t, then I think that may indicate that they haven’t yet communicated that they’re struggling to agree…Just lots to discuss I guess. JMO.
Agree with the first part. I think they’d definitely let him know if they were struggling to agree, but that wouldn’t necessarily be reported.Normally juries don't initiate telling the judge they're struggling to agree, but this is a highly unusual jury.
There have been no reports saying the judge has issued a majority direction, but I wouldn't necessarily conclude that he hasn't. If he is holding back, that's probably wise.
Judges are very careful in what they tell juries, including when they give majority directions. For instance they can't imply that if ALMOST the required number of jurors support such-and-such a verdict, well they should try to persuade the few who don't to change their minds. They definitely can't say or imply anything like that!
If an 11-person jury fails to reach a decision on a charge, then assuming a majority direction has been given the split could have been in any of 8 different ways (9-2 in favour of not guilty, 8-3, 7-4, ... , all the way to 3-8 and 2-9) - and no-one will know which one because jurors aren't allowed to say.
5 | T20237104 | constance marten mark alton gordon | ||||
|
Agree with the first part. I think they’d definitely let him know if they were struggling to agree, but that wouldn’t necessarily be reported.
I’ve never known it not to be reported when the judge communicates he will accept a majority though. But that’s JME.
Remember we are already down 1 juror to 11, so he may hold off offering a majority option yet. Plus, it still means only 1 can differ in their verdict (10-1)
It's only in the England and Wales jurisdiction and the Northern Ireland jurisdiction that a judge can give a majority direction. He can't speak to the jury in the absence of defence and prosecution, so they definitely get to hear. Whether his direction is reported in the media is another matter. In the Scottish jurisdiction this doesn't arise, because a majority can be 8-7 from the outset.I agree Diana. With UK cases at least, we always get a heads up when the Judge decides to allow a majority verdict.
Wow, 8-7! That concerns me alotIt's only in the England and Wales jurisdiction and the Northern Ireland jurisdiction that a judge can give a majority direction. He can't speak to the jury in the absence of defence and prosecution, so they definitely get to hear. Whether his direction is reported in the media is another matter. In the Scottish jurisdiction this doesn't arise, because a majority can be 8-7 from the outset.
Agreed. It means if they take a vote as soon as they get into the room, they don't have to discuss anything, given that 15 is an odd number.Wow, 8-7! That concerns me alot
5 | T20237104 | constance marten mark alton gordon | |||
|
Sorry, not the UK, England and Wales.In the UK a majority of at least 10 votes out of 12 is needed for a verdict. If fewer jurors remain, majorities allowed are 11–0, 10–1, 10–0, 9–1 and 9–0
There goes this afternoon’s productivity!