As Grobbelaar's counsel Richard Hartley QC put it, 'Insofar as any of us know, it has never been done before'. Lord Justice Simon Brown is reported to have said, 'It is, I think, the experience of all of us that juries from time to time do arrive at perverse verdicts'. Well, it is of constitutional importance that the jury is entitled to reach verdicts which state officials such as Lord Justice Simon Brown find perverse. From the point of view of the individual, trial by jury is a good thing for many reasons. Twelve heads are safer than one, two or three heads.
Fresh heads are safer than case-hardened ones.
Independent heads are safer than those with a professional or career stake in the system. Most importantly, and this is particularly important in the criminal sphere, the jury is entitled to make decisions according to its conscience even in the face of the law. It is the certainty of that second proposition that has now been eroded. His decision, however, leaves the door wide open to that principle now being successfully challenged. Those who applaud the decision of the Court of Appeal seem to think that just because it appears clear that Grobbelaar is a crook then justice requires the verdict to be reversed.