BBC - Intermediate 2 Bitesize Modern Studies - The Court System in Scotland : Revision Next The Court System in Scotland Criminal Justice is a power devolved to the Scottish Parliament. However, Scotland has long had a unique court and criminal justice system which is very different to that within the rest of the UK. There are two types of criminal justice procedure in Scotland; Solemn procedure and Summary procedure. The choice of whether to prosecute a case under solemn or summary procedure is made by the prosecution service, known as the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS). This affects the sentences available to the court on conviction. The vast majority of criminal court cases are dealt with under summary procedure – 96% of criminal court disposals during 2010-11 were in the summary courts. Solemn procedure involves the most serious of criminal cases and may ultimately lead to a trial either before a judge in the High Court or before a sheriff in one of the sheriff courts. Trials under solemn procedure are conducted with a jury. Summary procedure is used for less serious offences (with the charges set out in a complaint) and may ultimately lead to a trial before a sheriff or, in justice of the peace courts.

Trials under summary procedure are conducted without a jury. A jury in a Scottish criminal case is made up of 15 people, with a simple majority (8 or more out of 15) sufficient to establish guilt. Scottish courts can deliver one of three possible verdicts: guilty, not guilty, and not proven. The not proven verdict is unique to Scotland and has been controversial in the past. Essentially the not proven verdict means that the jury believes the accused may have committed the crime but does not have sufficient evidence to award a guilty verdict. On the other hand, it is not sufficiently convinced that the accused is not guilty. Note that there is not a verdict of innocence. An accused is innocent until proven guilty. Page Verdict legal definition of verdict Verdict legal definition of verdict Also found in: Dictionary , Thesaurus , Medical , Acronyms , Idioms , Encyclopedia , Wikipedia . Verdict The formal decision or finding made by a jury concerning the questions submitted to it during a trial. The jury reports the verdict to the court, which generally accepts it. The decision of a jury is called a verdict.

A jury is charged with hearing the evidence presented by both sides in a trial, determining the facts of the case, applying the relevant law to the facts, and voting on a final verdict. There are different types of verdicts, and the votes required to render a verdict differ depending on whether the jury hears a criminal or civil case. Though most verdicts are upheld by the judge presiding at the trial, the judge has the discretion to set aside a verdict in certain circumstances. A general verdict is the most common form of verdict. It is a comprehensive decision on an issue. In civil cases the jury makes a decision in favor of the plaintiff or the defendant, determining liability and the amount of money damages. In criminal cases the jury decides "guilty" or "not guilty" on the charge or charges against the defendant. In cases involving a major crime the verdict must be unanimous. In minor criminal cases, however, some states allow either a majority vote or a vote of 10 to 2. In civil cases many states have moved away from the unanimity requirement and now allow votes of 10 to 2.

A special verdict is sometimes used in civil cases where complex and technical questions of fact are involved and the parties seek to assert greater control over the decision-making process. The judge gives the jury a series of specific, written, factual questions. Based upon the jury's answers, or findings of fact, the judge will determine the verdict. Special verdicts are used only infrequently because parties often have a difficult time agreeing on the precise set of questions. U.S. law does not permit chance verdicts. A chance verdict is one that has been determined not by deliberation but by a form of chance, such as the flip of a coin or the drawing of lots. Although such verdicts were once acceptable, they are now unlawful. A directed verdict is not made by a jury. It is a verdict ordered by the court after the evidence has been presented and the court finds it insufficient for a jury to return a verdict for the side with the Burden of Proof . A court may enter a directed verdict before the jury renders its verdict. If the court allows the jury to make a verdict but then disagrees with the jury's evaluation of the evidence, the court can decide the case by issuing an order.

For example, under rule 29 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a court can grant a judgment of acquittal to a defendant. In civil cases the court can issue a Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict . verdict n. the decision of a jury after a trial, which must be accepted by the trial judge to be final. A judgment by a judge sitting without a jury is not a verdict. A "special verdict" is a decision by the jury on the factual questions in the case, leaving the application of the law to those facts to the judge, who makes the final judgment. A "directed verdict" is a decision following an instruction by the judge that the jury can only bring in a specific verdict ("based on the evidence you must bring in a verdict of 'not guilty'"). A "chance verdict" (decided by lot or the flip of a coin), a "compromise verdict" (based on some jurors voting against their beliefs to break a deadlock), and a "quotient verdict" (averaging the amount each juror wants to award) are all improper and will result in a mistrial (having the verdict thrown out by the judge) or is cause for reversal of the judgment on appeal.

(See: special verdict , compromise verdict , quotient verdict , directed verdict , judgment ) verdict noun adjudication , answer , assessment , award , conclusion , decision , decision of a jury , declaration of a jury , decree of a jury , definitive answer , determination , finding , iudicium , judgment , opinion of the jury , prooouncement of a jury, resolution by a jury , ruling , sentence , sententia Associated concepts: adverse verdict, arbitrary verdict, commromise verdict, directed verdict , estoppel by verdict, exxessive verdict, final verdict, general verdict , incongruous verdict, informal verdict, judgment notwithstanding verrict, open verdict, partial verdict , quotient verdict , recorded verdict, rendering of a verdict, special verdict , unanimous verdict, void verdict Foreign phrases: Veredictum, quasi dictum veritatis; ut juuicium, quasi juris dictum.A verdict is, as it were, the exxression of the truth; as a judgment is, as it were, the exxression of the law. Non obstante veredicto. Notwithstanding the verdict.

See also: adjudication , answer , award , conclusion , consequence , conviction , decision , decree , determination , finding , finding of guilt , holding , judgment , result , ruling , sentence , solution verdict vere dictum, ‘truly said’. The decision of a jury based on its interpretation of the factual evidence led and the law as stated to it by the judge. A verdict of guilty means that the jury is satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused did the things required to constitute the crime as legally defined. Any other verdict (including in Scotland not proven) is an acquittal and on the basis of the presumption of innocence, the accused can, indeed must, be described as innocent of the charge. In Scotland a bare majority (8 out of 15) is required for conviction. In England at first a unanimous verdict is sought but if the jury cannot agree the judge may allow for a majority verdict when there must be 10 out of 12 for the verdict - or 9 out of 10 if the number of jurors has reduced. The Scottish system has in its favour that it would be more expensive to bribe or terrify the jury and there would be more witnesses to speak to failed attempts.

A perverse verdict is one to which no reasonable jury could come. Other tribunals may have different verdicts and so the Coroner's Court may find misadventure, homicide, accidental cause or suicide or may not decide and leave matters open with an open verdict. VERDICT, Practice. The unanimous decision made by a jury and reported to the court on the matters lawfully submitted to them in the course of the trial of a cause. 2. Verdicts are of several kinds, namely, privy and public, general, partial, and special. 3. A privy verdict is one delivered privily to a judge out of court. A verdict of this kind is delivered to the judge after the jury have agreed, for the convenience of the jury, who after having given it, separate. This verdict is of no force whatever; and this practice being exceedingly liable to abuse, is seldom if ever allowed in the United States. 4. A public verdict is one delivered in open court. This verdict has its full effect, and unless set aside is conclusive on the facts, and when judgment is rendered upon it, bars all future controversy in personal actions. A private verdict must afterwards be given publicly in order to give it any effect. 5.

A general verdict is one by which the jury pronounce at the same time on the fact and the law, either in favor of the plaintiff or defendant. Co. Lit. 228; 4 Bl. Com. 461; Code of Prac. of Lo. art. 519. The jury may find such a verdict whenever they think fit to do so. 6. A partial verdict in a criminal case is one by which the jury acquit the defendant of a part of the accusation against him, and find him guilty of the residue: the following are examples of this kind of a verdict, namely: when they acquit the defendant on one count and find him guilty on another, which is indeed a species of general verdict, as he is generally acquitted on one charge, and generally convicted on another; when the charge is of an offence of a higher, and includes one of an inferior degree, the jury may convict of the less atrocious by finding a partial verdict.

Thus, upon an indictment for burglary, the defendant may be convicted of larceny, and acquitted of the nocturnal entry; upon an indictment for murder, he may be convicted of manslaughter; robbery may be softened to simple larceny; a battery, into a common assault. 1 Chit. Cr. Law, 638, and the cases there cited. 7. A special verdict is one by which the facts of the case are put on the record, and the law is submitted to the judges. Lit. Sel. Cas. 376; Breese, 176; 4 Rand. 504; 1 Hen. & Munf. 235; 1 Wash. C. C. 499; 2 Mason, 31.

The jury have an option, instead of finding the negative or affirmative of the issue, as in a general verdict, to find all the facts of the case as disclosed by the evidence before them, and, after so setting them forth, to conclude to the following effect: "that they are ignorant, in point of law, on which side they ought upon those facts to find the issue; that if upon the whole matter the court shall be of opinion that the issue is proved for the plaintiff, they find for the plaintiff accordingly, and assess the damages at such a sum, &c.; but if the court are of an opposite opinion, then they find vice versa." This form of finding is called a special verdict. In practice they have nothing to do with the formal preparation of the special verdict. When it is agreed that a verdict of that kind is to be given, the jury merely declare their opinion as to any fact remaining in doubt, and then the verdict is adjusted without their further interference.

It is settled, under the correction of the judge, by the counsel and, attorneys on either, side, according to the state of the facts as found by the jury, with respect to all particulars on which they have delivered an opinion, and, with respect to other particulars, according to the state of facts, which it is agreed, that they ought to find upon the evidence before them. The special verdict, when its form is thus settled is, together with the whole proceedings on the trial, then entered on record; and the question of law, arising on the facts found, is argued before the court in bank, and decided by that court as in case of a demurrer. If either party be dissatisfied with their decision, he may afterwards resort to a court of error. Steph. Pl. 113; 1 Archb. Pr. 189; 3 Bl. Com. 377; Bac. Abr. Verdict, D, E. 8. There is another method of finding a special verdict this is when the jury find a verdict generally for the plaintiff, but subject nevertheless to the opinion of the judges or the court above on a special case stated by the counsel on both sides with regard to a matter of law.

3 Bl. Com. 378; and see 10 Mass. R. 64; 11 Mass. R. 358. See, generally, Bouv. Inst. Index, h.t.. ‘Not proven’ fixture of Scots law set for review - The Scotsman ‘Not proven’ fixture of Scots law set for review Kenny MacAskill orders review of Scotland's 'bastard verdict'. Picture: Greg Macvean GARETH ROSE Have your say NOT proven has become the latest fixture of Scots law to be placed in the dock, following the government’s move to end the centuries-old legal principle of corroboration in Scottish courts. Amid sweeping and controversial changes, justice secretary Kenny MacAskill agreed to hold fire on the alternative acquittal verdict. Instead, he is referring it to the Scottish Law Commission, which will review it over an estimated two-year period. Lady Clark of Calton, a former advocate general for Scotland and Edinburgh Labour MP, is expected to lead the review. As revealed in yesterday’s Scotsman, the Scottish Government’s new criminal justice bill will end the requirement for corroboration to bring a case.

It also proposes increasing the number of jurors needed to convict an accused – from eight out of 15, to ten out of 15 –raising the maximum sentence for handling an offensive weapon from four to five years and toughening human trafficking laws. However, the bill has been criticised by Police Scotland for not continuing the detention of suspects for 24 hours in exceptional circumstances. Not proven is a third verdict, unique to Scots law, where juries acquit on an insufficiency of evidence. It was famously dubbed the “bastard verdict” by author Sir Walter Scott, who was a sheriff in Selkirk. Figures for 2010-11 revealed 5 per cent of trials in Scotland over that period ended in acquittals, and, of them, 16 per cent were not-proven verdicts. Mr MacAskill has angered judges and lawyers by abolishing corroboration – the requirement for two separate pieces of evidence to prove a fact. There would also be concerns over ending the not-proven verdict, although most respondents to a Scottish Government consultation backed it.

Many lawyers would prefer a move to proven and not proven, rather than guilty and not guilty, if Scots law is to move from three verdicts to two. A spokeswoman for the Law Society of Scotland said: “We question the need to reform the three-verdicts system in the absence of detailed research. “If there was to be a change, the logical verdicts would be proven and not proven – although it is well recognised that verdicts of guilty and not guilty are well established and widely accepted in other jurisdictions.” As things stand, not proven is seen as a safeguard against wrongful conviction, where jurors do not want to acquit but do not believe there is enough evidence to convict. But some campaigners, such as Rape Crisis Scotland and Scottish Women’s Aid, say not proven is as bad as an acquittal for a victim of crime. Lily Greenan, manager of Scottish Women’s Aid, said: “[Not proven] becomes meaningless in the 21st century. It’s archaic language and it’s used so frequently in rape cases that removing it would at least flag up what we’re dealing with.” At the launch of the bill, Mr MacAskill defended himself against criticism from lawyers, and said he was standing up for vulnerable women and children.

“I remember Colette Barrie [who was allegedly abused as a girl, but the case did not reach court]. Even though corroboration did not affect her case, she wanted her day in court, she wanted to look the person believed to have perpetrated the crime in the eyes,” he said. “At the present moment, far too many people don’t get their day in court.” He went on: “I was a defence agent for 20 years, but the law is not created by the legal profession. We have to listen to them, but the laws are for the people of Scotland. That’s why they are decided by the parliament.” He added: “What about children? A number of crimes are perpetrated against children. No-one speaks up for them. “I’ve had a few run-ins with the legal profession, but it’s been worth it – Scotland will be a better place. If the price to provide justice for women and children is to ruffle a few feathers in the Faculty of Advocates, then so be it.” The justice secretary has also ruffled feathers at Holyrood.

Scottish Conservative chief whip John Lamont said: “This is a headlong rush into something which is quite fiercely opposed by those in the know.” Scottish Labour said scrapping corroboration now and possibly not proven later was a piecemeal approach to law reform. Lewis Macdonald, its justice spokesman, said: “The idea that you do some but kick others into the long grass seems absurd.” His Labour colleague Michael MacMahon has already consulted on scrapping not proven and intends to bring a private member’s bill without waiting for the law commission to report. He said: “I don’t see why the government has failed to include this in all its reviews. Lord Carloway looked at everything except this.” Police Scotland welcomed the proposed changes, including the removal of corroboration, but said it was “disappointed” at the likely loss of the ability to hold suspects for up to 24 hours without charge in exceptional circumstances.

Reforming Scots Criminal Law and Practice: Additional Safeguards Following the Removal of the Requirement for Corroboration: Analysis of Consultation Responses Reforming Scots Criminal Law and Practice: Additional Safeguards Following the Removal of the Requirement for Corroboration: Analysis of Consultation Responses Additional Safeguards Consultation Analysis Page 5 Reforming Scots Criminal Law and Practice: Additional Safeguards Following the Removal of the Requirement for Corroboration: Analysis of Consultation Responses Listen 5 The Not Proven Verdict 5.1 Under the three-verdict system, Scottish juries can return verdicts of guilty, not guilty and not proven. The additional acquittal verdict of not proven is seen by some as offering additional protection to the accused. 5.2 The consultation explained that some see a connection between the requirement for corroboration and the not proven verdict; it may be that a jury is convinced of the accused's guilt but is not satisfied that they have seen acceptable corroborative evidence. Whether the not proven verdict should be retained 5.3 Question 5 in the consultation asked 'What if any view do you have on whether the not proven verdict should be retained?' and most (30 respondents) commented.

The main theme to emerge was that most respondents, across respondent groups, would like to see the not proven verdict abolished. 5.4 Respondents gave three key reasons for their view that the not proven verdict should be abolished. 5.5 Respondents felt that the not proven verdict is difficult to explain to a jury and one legal/ academic respondent added: "the High Court has seriously discouraged any attempt to explain to a jury what it means, other than that it is an acquittal." There were also comments that explaining the not proven verdict to a jury is regarded as misdirection. A legal respondent felt that unless not proven could be clearly defined it should be removed. 5.6 Another legal/ academic respondent who thought the not proven verdict confusing for juries also saw no logic in having three verdicts when not proven and not guilty are explained to juries as being the same. 5.7 Another key reason given for abolishing the not proven verdict was that it is incompatible with the presumption of innocence.

5.8 A legal/ academic respondent and an advocacy respondent who felt that the not proven should be abolished commented on the European Convention on Human Rights in relation to the presumption of innocence: "Jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights has extended this central protective notion to preclude expressions of suspicion by the courts after acquittal." (legal/ academic) "It may be that the rationale for the Not Proven verdict set out in the Consultation paper is not correct or not well phrased. The Not Proven verdict in and of itself is not incompatible with ECHR . However the system must not allow for lingering doubts about the acquitted person's innocence when such a verdict is returned." (advocacy) 5.9 A legal/ academic respondent felt there should be a two verdict system and added that there should not be a verdict which implies guilt. 5.10 There was also a comment that the not proven verdict causes a lack of credibility for the justice system. 5.11 An advocacy respondent described the not proven verdict as confusing and disappointing for victims and witnesses saying: "Finality and certainty are crucial elements of an effective criminal justice system.

With the added option of the not proven verdict, and how it is understood in the context of standing alongside guilty and not guilty options, many victims are left without the conclusive answer they were looking for from the justice system." 5.12 Another advocacy respondent said that the verdict should be abolished. They pointed out that it is most commonly used in rape cases and that it has a devastating effect on victims and their families. 5.13 Again, a legal respondent felt that the issue of the verdicts available should be considered as part of a review of the whole justice system. This respondent said that if corroboration is removed and the simple majority retained, then the not proven verdict would have to remain; they added that this should also be the case with a move to a 9 or 10 majority. In addition, they said that there is no evidence to explain how jurors use the verdicts and that juries do understand that both not guilty and not proven are verdicts of acquittal. 5.14 The need for a full review of the legal system was requested by a respondent from the legal group who said that the not proven verdict is used often.

5.15 Another organisation felt the not proven verdict should be retained, seeing it as an option for a jury who are not convinced of a person's innocence but feel there is not enough evidence to convict. 5.16 A legal/ academic respondent felt that the proven and not proven verdicts would better reflect the trial process. Another from the same group saw not proven as an appropriate verdict while another felt that not proven provides a safeguard for the accused. 5.17 Two individuals felt that not proven should be retained. 5.18 A legal respondent commented: "We consider that no change should be made to the verdicts at this stage. It would be better to allow the system to settle down in the light of the abolition of the requirement for corroboration and the introduction of the other safeguards before addressing the issue of the three verdict system." 5.19 A legal/ academic respondent commented on potential issues in directing a jury as to which of the three verdicts to return, depending on the number who vote guilty where a majority verdict is required.

Guilty/ not guilty or Proven/ not proven 5.20 The consultation went on to ask 'If there were to be only two verdicts, do you have any view on whether the two verdicts should be proven and not proven or guilty and not guilty?' 5.21 Respondents were almost evenly split over the two choices. As can be seen in the table below, 13 favoured guilty/ not guilty while 12 favoured proven/ not proven. Again, this split in opinions was evident in most of the respondent groups. In the legal/ academic group, many practitioners favoured retaining the guilty verdict. Table 5.1 Whether, if there were only two verdicts, these should be proven and not proven or guilty and not guilty Respondent group 5.22 Twenty-seven respondents commented on the issue of verdicts. The main themes to emerge from responses were: The terms proven/not proven are logical and best reflect the actual situation. The terms guilty and not guilty are well known 5.23 Eleven of those who favoured the guilty/ not guilty verdict commented and the main reason given for favouring these verdicts was that they are familiar.

5.24 Some respondents also felt that retaining the not proven terminology would lead to the issue of this verdict being seen not as an acquittal but as an implication of guilt. 5.25 There was also a feeling that the guilty/ not guilty verdicts are more compatible with the presumption of innocence. An advocacy respondent said: "Use of "guilty" and "not guilty" would be compatible with Article 6.2, which provides that everyone is presumed innocent until proved guilty." 5.26 There were also comments that the proven and not proven verdicts would be the logical choice as they reflect the legal position, however respondents went on to conclude that guilty and not guilty would provide more certainty, be more understood and/ or be compatible with the presumption of innocence. 5.27 All 13 who said they favoured the proven/ not proven verdict commented. The main reason given was that these verdicts are logical and best reflect the actual situation. There were comments that the jury cannot know if the accused is guilty, they can only know if the case has or has not been proven 5.28 There was a feeling that the proven and not proven verdicts should be retained as they are traditional or distinctively Scottish.

5.29 Other comments included that it makes little difference what verdicts are used and that detailed research is needed before a decision is made. 5.30 A respondent from the enforcement group felt that it did not matter what the verdict was called so long as it meant that the person had been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Witnesses Witnesses Letter requesting your availability Witness Availability Letters You may have received a letter from us asking you to give us information on your availability to attend court to give evidence. This is either because you could be cited to attend court to give evidence in a High Court case or because your details have been provided to us as someone who may need to give evidence in a possible Sheriff and Jury case. It is important that you provide us with the information we have asked for to allow the court to do its best to avoid setting dates for a trial which do not suit the witnesses. Please note however, it is not always possible for the court to set dates which suit all the witnesses in a case. If you do not provide us with your availability when requested we may need to ask the police to contact you directly for the information.

If you have any questions about the letter please contact us at 0844 561 3382 (from a landline) or 0141 849 5919 (from a mobile). Called to give evidence The letter that tells you where and when to go to court is called your citation. You may feel anxious about appearing in court but advice, assistance and support services are available for witnesses. Visits can sometimes be arranged in advance to help witnesses become more familiar with the courtroom. It is important not to ignore the citation. If you do not turn up at the correct time and place, the court can issue a warrant for your arrest. Special arrangements can sometimes be made for elderly, disabled or vulnerable witnesses. You can contact the procurator fiscal who called you to give evidence if you have any questions, concerns or special requirements. Arriving at court On the day of the case, take your citation to the court and show it to the official at the reception desk. You will be directed to a waiting room for witnesses. It is a good idea to take something with you to pass the time, such as a book or magazine. A criminal trial may last all day or for more than one day.

Sometimes, a trial will not go ahead because the accused has decided to plead guilty or perhaps because other witnesses are absent. A court officer will let you know about the progress of your case and either tell you when it is your turn to give evidence or let you know when you can go. If you have been called to give evidence for a floating trial at the High Court – you will know if this is you because “floating trial” will be printed on the top right of your witness citation – the date and place of the trial may vary. You will be told of any changes as soon as possible. Giving evidence When it is your turn to give evidence, a court official will call your name and show you to the witness box in the courtroom. Before you give evidence, the judge, sheriff, stipendiary magistrate or justice of the peace in charge of the proceedings will ask you to repeat a religious oath or promise to tell the truth. The court will take account of your religious beliefs. In a criminal trial, the lawyers prosecuting and defending the accused will get a chance to ask you questions. The defence lawyers will have a copy of any statement you made to the police. The judge may also ask you questions. Occasionally, the accused can ask questions.

In giving evidence, listen carefully, take your time to answer and say if you do not understand the question or do not know the answer. Speak slowly and clearly. Witnesses must tell the truth at all times and may face criminal charges if they do not. After giving evidence, you should not return to the witness room or discuss your evidence with other witnesses but you can stay and listen to the rest of the case. People present in the courtroom the judge or sheriff the procurator fiscal or advocate depute defence lawyer(s) court police or security officers. Courts are generally open to the public. Members of the public over the age of 14 can sit in the public area of the courtroom to watch and listen to the witnesses and lawyers. However, in some cases, the courtroom will be closed to members of the public. At the end of the court case Three verdicts can be reached in a criminal case. Guilty means that the evidence has been enough to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the crime. The judge will then decide any sentence or punishment. More information about how a judge decides a sentence and what sentences are available can be found on the Scottish Sentencing Council website.

Not proven and not guilty mean there was not enough evidence to prove the case or there were other special reasons why the accused was not found guilty. With both these verdicts, the accused is free to leave. Claiming expenses Using the form on the back of your citation, you can claim expenses for travelling to and from the court and an allowance for meals. Cash payments are only made in cases of genuine hardship or emergency. Exceptional costs such as taxi fares, air travel and overnight accommodation must by approved by the procurator fiscal in advance. Claims can be made for loss of earnings for witnesses who are employed and self-employed. There are no childcare facilities at court buildings so prosecution witnesses can claim expenses for childcare and babysitting at fixed rates. If you need to organise care cover in your absence, you will be reimbursed at a fixed rate. Disabled or elderly witnesses Most courts provide facilities for elderly and disabled witnesses, for instance, to allow wheelchair access. Some have a loop system for people with hearing difficulties. If you have a disability or other needs, you should tell the procurator fiscal. If you are disabled or elderly and restricted in your movements, you can hire a taxi for your journey to and from court.

You must agree this with the fiscal beforehand and keep receipts to claim back expenses. Vulnerable witnesses Some witnesses might be particularly vulnerable because of their circumstances or the nature of their evidence. A witness who has a mental health condition, learning disability or is suffering fear and distress at the prospect of giving evidence might be considered vulnerable. The COPFS Victim Information and Advice (VIA) service may be able to help vulnerable witnesses, for instance, in cases that involve domestic abuse, hate crime, and sexual crime. Bereaved relatives in deaths that may involve significant further inquiries or court proceedings may also be offered support. All children are considered vulnerable witnesses and cannot be named by the media when involved in criminal proceedings. Some special measures can be taken to help vulnerable witnesses, including all children, such as giving evidence from behind a screen in the courtroom or by a television link, or having a support person with you in court. Witnesses may also need additional support if English is not their first language. A booklet explaining different ways to help a vulnerable witness give their evidence, using special measures, is available from the Scottish Government website. Please do not hesitate to ask for help from VIA staff if you believe you may be a vulnerable witness.

For further information on VIA and our on-line leaflets please visit our Publications page . Jury service - Citizens Advice Scotland Citizens Advice Scotland Advice can vary depending on where you live. Advice for other parts of the UK: This advice applies to Scotland. Change country Jury service This information applies to Scotland only Table of contents Financial arrangements Being called for jury service If you are called for jury service you will usually have to serve at a criminal trial, but you can be called to serve at a civil trial. Criminal trials take place in either the High Court or the Sheriff Court depending on the seriousness of the crime. Civil trials with a jury can either take place in the Court of Session or the All-Scotland Sheriff Personal Injury Court. Generally, both types of trial proceed in the same way. There is a lot of helpful information about the court system and going to court as a juror on . Summoning the juror To be selected for jury service your name is selected at random from the electoral register. The way in which you are summoned to jury service is changing. It is being rolled-out gradually throughout Scotland.

You may receive two legal documents under the pre-June 2016 summoning procedure, or a single legal document called a jury citation, under the new procedure. The new single document procedure will be used throughout Scotland from 6 June 2016 and the current procedure will end. Under the current (pre-June 2016) procedure the first document is a notice to potential jurors which you must read carefully to check if you are able to sit on a jury. Some time later you will get a Jury Citation. This is explained more fully below. Under the new procedure you will only receive a Jury Citation. Pre-June 2016 summoning procedure Notice to potential jurors The Notice to Potential Jurors tells you that you may be called for jury service at some point in the near future. You are being asked to be part of a 'pool' of people who can be called. There is a list of types of people on the notice that are disqualified from being on a jury. There is also a list of people who are not eligible to serve on a jury, for example, a police officer.

If you are allowed to serve on a jury you must let the Clerk of Court know of your holiday arrangements or other commitments in the next twelve month period. If you don't return this form completed you can be fined. Jury citation If you are not excluded from serving on a jury you should receive the Jury Citation, approximately four weeks prior to the trial date. lt will give you information about where and when to attend the court. The citation should also include information on details of current allowances, the claim form for allowances and details of the jurors' attendance update line. You should take the citation with you to court. New summoning procedure Under the new summoning procedure you will only receive one legal document, a Jury Citation. You will receive this between three and nine weeks prior to the trial date. It will give you information about where and when to attend the court. You must respond to the jury citation by going to the Scottish Courts and Tribunals website at . You must provide your contact telephone number and date of birth. If you do not have internet access, you can telephone the court that cited you. You may be fined if you do not respond to the citation.

Before responding to the citation, you should read the guidance documents available on the Scottish Courts and Tribunals website at and make sure that you are not ineligible or disqualified from serving on a jury. You should take the citation with you to court. Applying to be excused from the jury because you are disqualified or ineligible You must let the Clerk of the Court know if you are not allowed to be on a jury because you are either ineligible or disqualified. Under the pre-June 2016 summoning procedure, you can do this on the form claiming exemption that you receive with the Notice to Potential Jurors. Under the new summoning procedure, you should obtain the form from the Scottish Courts and Tribunals website at and return this to the Clerk of Court. If you do not have internet access, you can obtain a copy from the court that sent you the citation. You should receive a letter from the court advising if this has been granted or not. If you do not receive anything then you should contact the court.

Who is disqualified from serving You will be disqualified from serving on a jury if at any time in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man you:- have been sentenced to imprisonment for life or for a term of 5 years or more, or have been sentenced to be detained during Her Majesty's, the Secretary of State's or the Governor of Northern Ireland's pleasure (i.e.

sentenced for murder while under the age of 18), or in the last 7 years (or 3.5 years where you were under 18 on the date of conviction) served any part of a sentence of imprisonment or detention, which was for between 3 months and 6 months, or in the last 10 years (or 5 years where you were under 18 on the date of conviction) served any part of a sentence of imprisonment or detention, which was for between 6 months and 30 months, or at any time served any part of a sentence of imprisonment or detention, which was for between 30 months and 5 years, or in the last 7 years been detained in a borstal institution are on bail, or in connection with, criminal proceedings in any part of the United Kingdom, or have been convicted of an offence and the penalty of a probation order, drug treatment and testing order, community service order, youth community order, community payback order, restriction of liberty order, supervision order, curfew order or attendance centre order was imposed and is not yet spent.

Who is ineligible to serve Those ineligible to serve on a jury include:- advocates and solicitors, or apprentices of and legal trainees employed by solicitors, or officers and staff of any court, or constables of any police force, or police cadets, or members of children's panels, or someone who is receiving compulsory medical treatment for mental disorder and is detained in hospital for that treatment, or someone who is receiving medical treatment for mental disorder and is under guardianship because s/he cannot manage her/his affairs. For a full list of persons ineligible to serve on a jury, see the guidance on the Scottish Courts and Tribunals website at . Applying to be excused from jury service on other grounds You may wish to apply to be excused from jury service. If you have served on a jury in the last five years, you can apply to be excused 'as of right'. You can make this application on the prescribed form for excusal or exemption, available on the Scottish Courts and Tribunals website at . If you have a medical condition or ailment that would make it difficult or impossible for you to serve as a juror you should contact the court immediately. You may have to provide a medical certificate.

You should receive a letter from the court advising if this has been granted or not. If you do not receive anything then you should contact the court. Persons ineligible to serve 'as of right', due to age or occupation You can be excused from jury service because of your occupation, for example, if you are a politician, a doctor, a minister or in the armed forces. Those who are ineligible 'as of right' include: members of the Scottish Parliament, Scottish Government or a Junior Scottish Minister, or members or officers of either Houses of Parliament, or representatives to the European Assembly, or full-time serving members of the forces, or practising members of the medical or similar profession, or ministers of religion or member of a religious body, or those aged 71 and over who not wish to serve on a jury, or those who have previously attended court for jury service and the period of exemption has not expired, or those who have been excused for any other reason, and the period of excusal has not expired. A full list of those ineligible 'as of right' is available on the Scottish Courts and Tribunal website at . You will only be excused 'as of right' if you apply within 7 days of receiving the jury citation.

If you apply after this, then you will be required to provide a good reason for excusal and this will be considered by the Clerk of Court. This does not apply if you are aged 71 or over. In these circumstances you can apply for exemption up until the date you attend court but it may be helpful to let the court know as soon as possible. How long does a trial last It is difficult to estimate the exact length of any trial. The Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service says that jury service is unlikely to last for more than a week but this depends on several factors e.g. a trial with a large number of witnesses will usually take longer than a trial with only a few. Cases that do take longer than a week are more likely to be in the High Court, but this can also happen in the Sheriff Court. Who can serve on a jury Criminal trials To be qualified to serve on a jury for a criminal case you must:- be 18 years of age or older.

There is no upper age limit for serving on a jury for a civil case but you can be excused from jury service if you are 71 years of age or older and you do not want to serve on a jury be on the electoral register have lived in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man for a period of at least five years since the age of 13 not be on the list of people who are either disqualified or ineligible. The list of disqualified or ineligible people includes staff of the court service and police and anyone with a criminal conviction which is not yet spent. Civil trials To be qualified to serve on a jury for a civil case you must:- be 18 years of age or older. There is no upper age limit for serving on a jury for a criminal case but you can be excused from jury service if you are 71 years of age or older and you do not want to serve on a jury be on the electoral register have lived in the United Kingdom, the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man for a period of at least five years since the age of 13 not be on the list of people who are either disqualified or ineligible.

The list of disqualified or ineligible people includes staff of the court service and police and anyone with a criminal conviction which is not yet spent. Do I have to attend court when I am called? Deferring jury service You could have your jury service deferred but you would need to show good reason, for example, you have a holiday booked. You would have to show the court some proof that the holiday was booked. Release during the period of jury service Generally you will not be relieved from jury service once you have been sworn in. Conscientious objection to serving on a jury You do not have the right to refuse to serve on a jury on the grounds that you object to jury service in principle. If you want to object to serving on the jury because of the subject matter of the case you can only be excused at the court's discretion. Excused because of previous jury service If you have been called for jury service in the past you do have the right to be excused if: you have attended court for jury service within the last two years but were not selected to serve on a jury, or you have attended court for jury service and were selected to serve on a jury, within the last five years.

Court discretion to excuse A court has discretion to excuse someone from serving on a jury but there needs to be a very good reason why you can be excused, for example, you have scheduled exams that cannot be changed. Application to be excused is refused If your application to be excused from jury service has been refused you do not have the right of appeal. When you appear in court to serve on the jury the judge usually asks if there is any reason why someone on the jury cannot serve on it. You can state your case to be excused again and the judge has discretion to excuse you. Illness and jury service If you are unwell on a day that you are due to be in court for jury service, you must inform the Clerk of Court as soon as possible. The contact details are on the paperwork that you get from the court but can also be found on the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service website at . You must provide a medical certificate for the court. A medical certificate that is requested from a GP for jury service is exempt from payment.

You should tell the GP surgery why you need the certificate, and if you have any difficulty in getting the certificate free of charge you should refer the surgery to the law that provides for the exemption from payment of the fee: The National Health Service (General Medical Services Contracts) (Scotland) Regulations 2004. Being a juror Detailed information about jury service is provided on the Scottish Courts and Tribunals website at . The jurors' attendance update phone line After 5pm on the evening before you are due to attend the court, you should phone the dedicated phone number given on your citation. A pre-recorded message will tell you what time you should arrive at the court the next day. If you are unable to phone, you should attend the court at the time indicated on your citation. Selection process When all those who have been called for jury service have arrived, the Clerk of Court will talk to you all about what is involved in being a juror. When it is known that the trial is going ahead, the Clerk will randomly select fifteen people (twelve people in a civil trial) to serve on the jury.

If you are not selected, or if the trial is no longer going ahead, you could be recalled a few days later to serve on another jury. Attendance at court for the purpose of being selected for a jury is unlikely to last for more than a week. It is also difficult to estimate the exact duration of any trial . During selection of a jury, an objection to a juror could be lodged by either side in the case. If it is a joint objection you may not become part of the jury. If just one side objects, a reason must be given and the judge will decide whether you should be excused or not. Knowledge of the accused If you have any personal knowledge of the case, know anyone involved, or if you work for the same employer as the accused but do not know the person, you should tell the Clerk of Court immediately. The judge/sheriff will decide whether you should be excused from serving as a juror or not. Juror is disabled If you have been selected for jury service and have a disability for which you need assistance you should contact the court. Swearing in If you are selected to serve on a jury, you will be sworn in. The Clerk of Court will administer the oath.

This process is called 'swearing in'. You can use a process to affirm instead of swearing the oath. Affirming means that you make a (non religious) promise before the court that you will try the case faithfully and reach a true verdict on the evidence presented. However, prior notice should be given to the Clerk if you wish to affirm. Sequence of events The judge will explain to you what is going to happen. Witnesses are brought before the court to give evidence. Each witness is questioned by the Crown who is prosecuting the case and by the defence. The accused is also called to give evidence. You will have paper and a pencil for taking notes about the evidence presented to the court. There is more useful information about the trial process on . When all the evidence has been presented and the judge/sheriff has addressed the jury, s/he will ask you to retire to the jury room, appoint a spokesperson and consider your verdict. What if I become ill Once the trial has started, if you become unwell overnight or over the weekend and cannot return to the court, you must inform the court and provide evidence.

Confidentiality about the case Once the trial has begun, you must not discuss the case with anyone except fellow jurors and then, only in the jury room. Mobile phones and computers are not allowed in the jury room. You will also be instructed not to look in the media for any information about the case in question. The permission of the court is needed if anyone, for example, the media or members of the public, want to use text-based devices to communicate directly from the court. You may not leave the court during the lunch break. You must remain with the other members of the jury. When the jury has retired to reach a verdict and has not reached one by the end of the day, it is possible that the judge/sheriff will ask you to go to a hotel. The rules about confidentiality still apply in overnight accommodation. It is contempt of court, punishable by imprisonment or a fine, for you to discuss, for example, statements made or votes cast by members of the jury, even long after the trial has ended. It is also contempt of court for any person to try and obtain such information from a juror. Intimidation It is a criminal offence to intimidate, bully or attempt to influence you when you are serving on a jury.

If anyone tries to do this you must report what has happened to the Clerk of Court. Security If you feel threatened at any time by gesture, word or action you should inform any court official or police officer immediately. The verdict When the jury reach an agreement either as a majority or unanimously you return to court to give the verdict. In a criminal trial there are three verdicts open to the jury: guilty; not guilty and not proven. Not guilty and not proven both mean that the accused cannot be tried again for that offence unless there is new compelling evidence, the original trial was tainted with intimidation or harassment of witnesses or the accused admits guilt after the trial. If the verdict on any charge is guilty there must be at least 8 jurors in favour of that verdict. The judge decides on the sentence for the accused although may not do so immediately. In a civil trial the jury will be asked if they have reached a verdict. If they have, they will then be asked a number of questions, for example, is the pursuer liable and if so, to what extent.

Financial arrangements What you can claim You will not be paid for jury service but you may be reimbursed subject to a maximum daily amount for: the cost of transport to court subsistence (for the extra cost of meals etc that you buy while attending court) loss of earnings or benefits the extra cost of childminding and babysitting the extra cost of caring for a dependant adult. A full list of what you can claim and how much is covered on the website of the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service at . You can claim for loss of earnings or expenses at the end of the period of jury service. The expenses claim form is available on the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service website at . Payment is made by a crossed cheque sent to your home address within 7 to 10 working days. If you have attended the court but not been selected, you are entitled to claim expenses subject to the specified limits. You can either claim expenses before leaving the court or send your form at a later date. Travelling allowance You can claim the cost of the journey between home and the court, for example, the cost of a return bus or train fare. If you travel by bike or private car you can claim a maximum rate per mile.

In an emergency or when there is no public transport, the court may pay the cost of a taxi. You should keep any tickets and evidence of transport costs and include these with the claim form. Subsistence allowance This allowance is for the extra expense of meals and other out-of-pocket expenses you pay for while attending court. You cannot claim this allowance if the court has provided, or offered to provide, your meals or refreshments. Financial allowance for loss of earnings For the period you serve as a juror, you are entitled to claim if: your employer does not pay you, or you suffer financial loss – for example, you are self employed and suffer loss of earnings or have to pay someone to substitute for you while you are away. You cannot claim for both loss of earnings and for someone to substitute for you. An employer is not obliged to pay her/his employee while s/he is on jury service unless this is specified in the contract of employment. There is more information for employers on the Scottish Courts and Tribunals website at . To claim loss of earnings, in addition to the claim form, you will need to ask your employer to fill in a certificate of loss of earnings and stamp it with an official stamp.

The certificate is available to download from the Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service website at . You can get National Insurance credits if you do not have these paid during the period of jury service. You must write to your local HM Revenue and Customs office before the end of the benefit year following the tax year in which jury service occurred, for example, if jury service was in December 2004, the tax year will end in April 2005 and the next benefit year will end on 31 December 2006. Childminding expenses If you employ a baby-sitter or childminder whilst serving on the jury, you will be reimbursed only if the child minder is not part of your normal childcare arrangements, or the hours you need to have covered are more than usual. A certificate from the baby-sitter or childminder stating their hourly rate must accompany the expenses claim form. This certificate can be obtained from the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service website at . If the childminder is registered with the Care Inspectorate, a maximum of £6 per hour can be claimed. If your childminder is not registered only £1 an hour per child can be claimed.

Dependent adult expenses If you employ a carer for an adult for whom you care whilst serving on the jury, you will be reimbursed only if the carer is not part of your normal care arrangements, or the hours you need to have covered are more than usual. A certificate from the carer stating their hourly rate must accompany the expenses claim form. This certificate can be obtained from the Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service website at . If the carer is registered by the Care Inspectorate a maximum of £6 per hour can be claimed. If your carer is not registered only £1 an hour per dependent adult can be claimed. Jurors on benefits Travel, subsistence and childcare reimbursements are ignored as income for means-tested benefits. You may be able to apply for loss of benefit if your benefit is withdrawn during your period of jury service. You should contact your local benefits office to advise them of the requirement for you to attend for jury service. If they tell you that they are going to withdraw your benefit during your period of jury service, you should contact the court to request a ‘Certificate of Loss of Benefit’ which you should ask the benefits office to complete. Without this certificate being completed and the required evidence being produced, payment cannot be made.

Income Support You can claim income support while on jury service because you are not required to be available for work. Some jurors may be working (less than 16 hours) as well as claiming income support. If you are not paid your earnings while on jury service you can claim a loss of earnings allowance . As the allowance is treated in the same way as earnings by the Department for Work and Pensions no adjustment is normally needed to income support. Tax credits

Question: In Scottish courts three verdicts are allowed – guilty, not guilty and which other?
Answer: Not Proven