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 Jury service - GOV.UK GOV.UK 7. Questions about jury service 1. Overview You must do jury service when you’re sent a jury summons form, unless you’re allowed to delay it. You must complete and return the form within 7 days. You can be fined up to £1,000 if you don’t return the form or turn up for your jury service. The jury service will be as close as possible to where you live. The court won’t pay you to do jury service, but you can claim expenses such as food, drink and travel. You can also claim for loss of earnings if your employer doesn’t pay you during your jury service. You can watch a video about jury service.

When you aren’t allowed to do jury service In some circumstances you can’t be on a jury, for example if you’ve been in prison in the last 10 years. These are listed in the guide to jury summons which is sent to you with the form. How long jury service lasts Jury service usually lasts up to 10 working days but can be longer. You may be on a jury for more than one trial during your service. Grand inquest legal definition of Grand inquest Grand inquest legal definition of Grand inquest Also found in: Dictionary , Thesaurus , Encyclopedia , Wikipedia . Grand Jury A panel of citizens that is convened by a court to decide whether it is appropriate for the government to indict (proceed with a prosecution against) someone suspected of a crime. An American institution since the colonial days, the grand jury has long played an important role in Criminal Law . The Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says that a person suspected of a federal crime cannot be tried until a grand jury has determined that there is enough reason to charge the person. Review by a grand jury is meant to protect suspects from inappropriate prosecution by the government, since grand jurors are drawn from the general population.

It has been criticized at times as failing to serve its purpose. The grand jury system originated in twelfth-century England, when King henry ii enacted the Assize of Clarendon in order to take control of the courts from the Catholic Church and local nobility. The proclamation said that a person could not be tried as a criminal unless a certain number of local citizens appeared in court to accuse him or her of specific crimes. This group of citizens, known as the grand assize, was very powerful: it had the authority to identify suspects, present evidence personally held by individual jurors, and determine whether to make an accusation. Trial was by ordeal, so accusation meant that conviction was very likely. (Trial by ordeal involved subjecting the defendant to some physical test to determine guilt or innocence. For example, in ordeal by water, a suspect was thrown into deep water: if he or she floated, the verdict was guilty; if the suspect sank, the verdict was innocent.) The grand assize was not designed to protect suspects, and it changed very little over the next five hundred years. Then, in 1681, its reputation began to evolve.

An English grand jury denied King Charles II's wish for a public hearing in the cases of two Protestants accused of Treason for opposing his attempts to reestablish the Catholic Church. The grand jury held a private session and refused to indict the two suspects. This gave the grand jury new respect as a means of protection against government bullying (although ultimately in those particular cases, the king found a different grand jury willing to indict the suspects). After this small act of rebellion, the grand jury became known as a potential protector of people facing baseless or politically motivated prosecution. The early colonists brought this concept to America, and by 1683, all colonies had some type of grand jury system in place. Over the next century, grand juries became more sympathetic to those who resisted British rule. In 1765, for example, a Boston grand jury refused to indict leaders of protests against the Stamp Act , a demonstration of resistance to colonialism. The grand jury was considered important enough to be incorporated into the U.S. Constitution, and has remained largely unchanged. Grand juries are used in the federal and most state courts. Federal grand juries use a standard set of rules.

States are free to formulate their own pretrial requirements, and they vary greatly in the number of grand jurors they seat, the limits they place on the deliberations of those jurors, and whether a grand jury is used at all. Federal courts use a grand jury that consists of 23 citizens but can operate with a quorum of 16. Twelve jurors' votes are required for an indictment. States use a grand jury consisting of as few as five but no more than 23 members. Grand juries are chosen from lists of qualified state residents of legal age, who have not been convicted of a crime, and who are not biased against the subject of the investigation. Hearsay Evidence: Admissible before a Grand Jury? The rules of evidence prohibit the introduction of most Hearsay evidence in a criminal trial.

(Hearsay is evidence given by a person concerning what someone else said outside of court.) However, when Frank Costello, alias Francisco Castaglia, a notorious Organized Crime figure of the 1940s and 1950s, argued that his conviction for federal income Tax Evasion should be overturned because the grand jury that indicted him heard only hearsay evidence, the Supreme Court rejected his claim (Costello v. United States, 350 U.S. 359, 76 S. Ct. 406, 100 L. Ed. 397 [1956]). Prior to his trial, Costello asked to inspect the grand jury record. He claimed there could have been no legal or competent evidence before the grand jury that indicted him. The judge refused the request. At trial, Costello's attorneys established that three investigating officers were the only witnesses to testify before the grand jury. These officers summarized the vast amount of evidence compiled by their investigation and introduced computations showing, if correct, that Costello had received far greater income than he had reported. Their summaries clearly constituted hearsay, since the three officers had no firsthand knowledge of the transactions upon which their computations were based.

Therefore, Costello alleged a violation of the Fifth Amendment , and asked that hearsay evidence be barred from grand jury proceedings. Justice hugo l. black, in his majority opinion, rejected these claims, noting that "neither the Fifth Amendment nor any other constitutional provision prescribes the kind of evidence upon which grand juries must act." The usual role of a grand jury is to review the adequacy of evidence presented by the prosecutor and then decide whether to indict the suspect. In some cases, a grand jury decides which charges are appropriate. Generally, grand jurors do not lead investigations, but can question witnesses to satisfy themselves that evidence is adequate and usable. The prosecutor prepares a bill of indictment (a list explaining the case and possible charges) and presents evidence to the grand jury. The jurors can call witnesses, including the target of the investigation, without revealing the nature of the case. They call witnesses by using a document called a subpoena. A person who refuses to answer the grand jury's questions can be punished for Contempt of court. However, no witness need answer incriminating questions unless that witness has been granted Immunity .

In federal courts, the jurors may accept Hearsay and other evidence that is normally not admissible at trial.If the grand jury agrees that there is sufficient reason to charge the suspect with a crime, it returns an indictment carrying the words true bill. If there is insufficient evidence to satisfy the grand jury, it returns an indictment carrying the words no bill. Seldom do grand juries issue documents. However, when given a judge's permission to do so, they may use a report to denounce the conduct of a government figure or organization against whom an indictment is not justified or allowed. This occurred in 1973, when U.S. district court judge John J. Sirica allowed the grand jury investigating the Watergate scandals to criticize President Richard Nixon's conduct in covering up the involvement of his administration in the June 17, 1972, Burglary of the Democratic National Committee headquarters in the Watergate Apartment and Hotel complex. The judge recommended that the report be forwarded to the House Judiciary Committee to assist in proceedings to impeach the president.

Many states allow the issuance of grand jury reports, but limit their use: the target must be a public official or institution who can be denounced only where statutory authority exists, and the resulting document can be released publicly only with a judge's approval. In February 1996, for the first time in history, a first lady of the United States was required to appear before a grand jury. Hillary Rodham Clinton testified for four hours before a federal grand jury on the disappearance and reappearance of billing records related to her representation of a failed investment institution that was under scrutiny when she was an attorney in Arkansas. Her testimony was part of the Whitewater investigation, which examined past financial dealings of Hillary Rodham Clinton, President bill clinton, and others. Should the Grand Jury Be Abolished? Though the grand jury has existed in the United States since the colonial period, and the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution requires its use in federal criminal proceedings, it has come under increasing attack. Critics charge that it no longer serves the functions the Framers intended, and therefore should be abolished. Defenders admit there may be some problems with it today, but contend that these can be remedied.

Critics aim their attacks at both federal and state grand juries. They note that a grand jury has two functions. One is to review evidence of criminal wrongdoing and to issue an indictment if the evidence is sufficient. The other is to be an investigative arm of the government, helping the prosecutor gather evidence. Critics contend that in both areas contemporary grand juries have failed. In reviewing evidence of criminal wrongdoing, a grand jury is supposed to act as a shield against ill-conceived or malicious prosecutions. Yet critics charge that grand juries typically rubber-stamp the prosecution's moves, indicting anyone the prosecutor cares to bring before it. Historically the grand jury was not dominated by a professional prosecutor. Without a strong attorney leading the way, the grand jury was forced to be independent and diligent in reviewing evidence brought before it. Critics note that many states abolished all or part of the grand jury's jurisdiction at the end of the nineteenth century, in large part because the process had come increasingly under the control of prosecutors. States acknowledged that a professional criminal prosecutor did not need a grand jury's assistance in the charging process. The prosecutor was capable of making an independent, disinterested review of the need to bring charges.

Though forty-eight states have grand juries as part of their criminal justice system, many of these judicial bodies are now reserved for serious felonies, usually first-degree murder. Those who favor Abolition of the grand jury argue that the domination of the prosecutor has led to a passivity that destroys the legitimacy of the grand jury concept. Most grand jurors have little background in law and must rely on the prosecutor to educate them about the applicable law and help them apply the law. In addition, at the federal level, there are very complex criminal laws, like the racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations statute. Even lawyers find many of these laws difficult to fathom, yet grand jurors are expected to understand them and apply them to intricate fact situations. Not surprisingly, charge the critics, the grand jury tends to follow the prosecution's advice. Critics point out that though the Fifth Amendment requires a grand jury indictment for all federal crimes, the accused may waive this requirement and accept charges filed by a prosecutor alone on all but capital crimes. Waivers are frequent, and most prosecutions of even serious offenses are initiated by federal prosecutors. Therefore, critics argue that it makes no sense to take additional time and money for a grand jury to convene and participate in a hollow ritual.

For its critics the grand jury has declined from a proactive community voice to a passive instrument of the prosecution. Though the U.S. Supreme Court may talk about the historic importance of the grand jury in Anglo-American justice, few academics defend the institution based on its current performance. Faced with this poor performance, the critics argue that abolition is the best course. It would make the prosecutor directly accountable for the charging decision and remove the illusion that grand jurors are in control. Defenders of the grand jury acknowledge that there are problems with the modern system, but insist the grand jury is worth saving. Despite its shortcomings the grand jury still allows citizens to help make important community decisions. Though critics may deplore prosecutorial domination of grand juries, they overgeneralize when they call the grand juries rubber stamps for the state. Congress recognized the competency and importance of citizen input when, in the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 3332–3333), it authorized the creation of "special" grand juries to investigate Organized Crime , return indictments if warranted, and issue reports on the results of their investigations.

Supporters also believe that the critics overemphasize the importance of the grand jury in acting as a shield against government oppression. The key function of the grand jury is to enhance the legitimacy of the criminal charges that are returned. Prosecutors use the grand jury to gain community support for charges that might otherwise be perceived as based on racial bias, political motivation, or prosecutorial vindictiveness. A grand jury review may also help a prosecutor avoid bringing charges where the formal requisites of a crime are present but the community's moral sense would regard charges as unjust. Some supporters of the grand jury admit that it could be improved by severing the close tie between prosecutor and jurors. They point out that Hawaii provides grand juries with their own attorney. Such a "grand jury counsel" provides independent legal advice and acts as a buffer between jurors and prosecutors. This, in turn, makes grand juries more independent and gives their indictments more credibility. Some scholars have argued that though using such a system nationwide would cost more, the added expense would be a small price to pay to reinvigorate the grand jury and restore it to its proper role as a voice of the community. Critics have complained that the grand jury offers witnesses and suspected criminals insufficient protection.

The cause of the controversy is the set of rules that govern the operation of federal grand juries. For example, a prosecutor manages the work of the grand jury, which some say is contradictory since the job of prosecutor is to prove a defendant's guilt. Another contradiction, according to critics, is that a defense attorney does not represent the suspect. Instead, prosecutors may be required in state grand jury proceedings to present, on behalf of the suspect, information that they feel is exculpatory (so strong that it could create a Reasonable Doubt that the suspect committed the crime); however, the U.S. Supreme Court has held that federal prosecutors are not required to do so in federal grand jury proceedings (United States v. Williams, 504 U.S. 36 [1992]). In arguing that a suspect should be charged, prosecutors may make arguments and use information that would normally not be admissible during a trial. Witnesses who are called before a grand jury are not allowed to have an attorney present when they testify. This holds true for a witness who may be a suspect. A final concern is that grand juries meet in secret, and a formal record of federal grand jury proceedings is not usually provided to the suspect even after indictment.

Critics of the current system claim that justice is ill served by these rules. They say that ambitious prosecutors may be tempted to misuse the powers of a nonprofessional grand jury to harass, trap, or wear down witnesses. For example, activists who opposed the Vietnam War during the 1960s and 1970s accused the Justice Department of abusing the grand jury system as it searched for information about political dissidents. The activists believed that the department used the power and secrecy of the grand jury to intimidate witnesses and fish for evidence. Members of the news media, the business community, and organized labor, have also criticized the institution. Supporters of the current system say that the secrecy of the grand jury's work prevents several things, including a suspect from escaping, attempts to influence jurors, and the coaching or intimidation of witnesses. Supporters also contend that the system encourages candid testimony and protects the privacy of innocent suspects who are later cleared. Regarding witnesses' lack of Legal Representation ,supporters of the status quo point out that delay, disruption, and rehearsed testimony would lessen the efficiency of the grand jury's work and would result in a Minitrial . Similar arguments have been made against limiting evidence that would not be admissible at trial.

In addition, federal courts have held that because the rights of a suspect are adequately protected during trial, where the strength or weakness of evidence determines the verdict, no examination of grand jury indictment proceedings is necessary. Grand juries also face criticism in the area of jury selection, especially with high-profile cases. Criticism focuses on bias and a lack of balance in the selection process. The requirement that grand juries be unbiased has evolved since 1807, when Vice President Aaron Burr was indicted as a traitor. Burr insisted that the evidence against him be heard by an "impartial" jury as guaranteed in the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution. He successfully challenged many jurors on the all-Republican grand jury that had been selected. Burr was willing to accept jurors who were familiar with some details of his famous case but who claimed they had not drawn any conclusions about it. (Although he was indicted, Burr was eventually acquitted at trial.) Today, an unbiased grand jury means one that comprises people who have no prior familiarity with the facts of the case. Critics of this requirement say that it greatly limits the quality of people who are chosen to sit, since many intelligent, engaged, and otherwise ideal candidates for a grand jury also follow the news.

On June 24, 1994, a California state judge dismissed a grand jury that was considering whether to indict former athlete and media personality O. J. Simpson for the murder of his ex-wife and her friend. The judge was responding to concerns, of both the prosecutor and the defendant, that grand jurors had been exposed to Pretrial Publicity that might prejudice them—such as transcripts of 911 calls made by Simpson's ex-wife after he broke down the back door to her house. After numerous struggles to balance grand juries racially and by gender, federal case law provides that "a defendant may challenge the array of grand jurors … on the ground that the grand jury was not selected, drawn or summoned in accordance with law, and may challenge an individual juror on the ground that the juror is not legally qualified" (Estes v. United States, 335 F.2d 609, cert. denied, 379 U.S. 964, 85 S. Ct. 656, 13 L. Ed. 2d 559).

There have been suggestions that the federal grand jury should be abolished, but this action seems unlikely because it would change the Bill of Rights for the first time. In addition, the investigative and indicting roles of the courts have to be performed by some entity, and an alternative entity may be less desirable than the grand jury. Some states have abolished grand juries or provided alternatives. For example, in some states, prosecutors are allowed to file an information, which is a formal list of charges, usually submitted with notice of some kind of Probable Cause hearing. Other suggestions for change at the federal level may experience more success. Among those promoted by groups such as the American Bar Association are: Better instructions from judges to jurors about the grand jury's powers and its independence from prosecutors Reports by prosecutors on the performance of the grand jury system Increased access to grand jury transcripts for suspects who are eventually indicted Expanded safeguards against abuse of witnesses, including education about their rights and the presence of their attorneys Notification of targets of investigations that they are targets Optional rather than mandatory appearances by targets of investigations An end to the requirement that prosecutors present defense evidence, and replacement with a requirement that grand jurors be informed that the defense was not represented in the hearing. Further readings Beale, Sara Sun, et al.

1997. Grand Jury Law and Practice. 2d ed. St. Paul, Minn.: West Group. Brenner, Susan W. 1995. "The Voice of the Community: A Case for Grand Jury Independence." Virginia Journal of Social Policy and the Law 3. Farrel, Lyn, ed. 2002. The Federal Grand Jury. New York: Novinka Books. Goldstein, Howard W. 1998. Grand Jury Practice. New York: Law Journal Seminars-Press. Iraola, Roberto. 2003."Terrorism, Grand Juries, and the Federal Material Witness Statute." St. Mary's Law Journal 34 (winter). Justice Department. National Institute of Justice. Office of Development, Testing, and Dissemination. 1983. Grand Jury Reform: A Review of Key Issues. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Leipold, Andrew D. 1995. "Why Grand Juries Do Not (and Cannot) Protect the Accused." Cornell Law Review 80 (January).Simmons, Ric. 2002.

"Re-Examining the Grand Jury: Is There Room for Democracy in the Criminal Justice System?" Boston University Law Review 82 (February). Skolnik, Sam. 1999. "Grand Jury: Power Shift?" Legal Times (April 12). Worden, Amy. 2000."Lawyers Target 'Lawless' Federal Grand Juries." ABP News Online. Available online at < (accessed September 19, 2003). Cross-references Jury service You are here: Home > Justice > Courtroom > Jury service Jury service Further information Introduction Most non-minor criminal offences require a trial by a judge and jury . Some civil cases, for example, defamation, require a jury trial. Information on what jurors do is available in our document on the role of a jury . Jurors are contacted by summons of the County Registrar, which will state that you are obliged to attend for jury service on a particular date.

Eligibility for jury service Every Irish citizen from the age of 18 (no upper age limit since 1 January 2009) who is on the Register of Dáil Electors is eligible for jury service except: Those involved in any way with the administration of justice. This includes judges, former judges, the President , the Attorney General , the Director of Public Prosecutions, members of the Gardai and defence forces , prison officers, practising barristers, solicitors, court officers such as registrars and personnel in Government departments involved in matters of justice or the courts. Those who are unable to read or have a long-term impairment so that it is not practicable for them to serve on a jury. The rules about eligibility for jury service in Ireland are set down in Section 6 and the First Schedule of the Juries Act, 1976 as amended by Section 54 and Section 64 of the Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2008 . Disqualification The following persons are disqualified from jury service: Those who have been convicted of a serious offence in Ireland. Those who have ever been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of five years or more.

Those who, within the last ten years, have been sentenced to a term of imprisonment of three months. People living in Ireland who are not Irish citizens. Those who are excused as of right The following persons may be excused as of right from jury service: Since January 2009 those aged 65 or over Members of the either House of the Oireachtas (the Irish Parliament), members of the Council of State , the Comptroller and Auditor General , the Clerks of Dáil Éireann and Seanad Éireann, a person in Holy Orders, a minister of any religious denomination or community, members of monasteries and convents, aircraft pilots, full-time students and ship's masters Those who provide an important community service, such as practising doctors, nurses, midwives, dentists, vets, chemists, etc. The following persons if it is certified that their functions cannot reasonably be performed by another person or postponed; members of staff of either House of the Oireachtas, Heads of Government Departments, other civil servants , chief executive officers and employees of local authorities, Health Service Executive (HSE) Areas and harbour authorities, school teachers and university lecturers.

Those who have served on a jury within the last three years or who have been excused by a judge at the conclusion of a previous period of service for a period that has not ended. Other occasions when you may be excused Other occasions when you may be excused include: The County Registrar or the trial judge may excuse you if he is satisfied that there is "good reason" for doing so. At the end of a case of "an exceptionally exacting nature", the trial judge may excuse the jury from jury service for as long as the judge considers fit. The rules about ineligibility and disqualification from jury service are set out in Section 7 and Section 8 of the Juries Act, 1976 . Offences Under the Juries Act, the following offences are punishable by fines: Failing to attend for jury service without reasonable excuse, or not being available when called upon to serve as a juror or being unfit for service by reason of drink or drugs. Making or causing to be made on your behalf false representations. Serving on a jury knowing you are ineligible or disqualified. Giving false or misleading answers to the presiding judge regarding your qualification for jury service.

Making or causing to be made on behalf of a person summoned as a juror any false representations to enable him or her to evade jury service. Selection of jurors As mentioned above jurors are contacted by summons of the County Registrar. You must reply to the jury summons by using the form and pre-paid envelope provided. If you come within the categories of persons excusable from jury service as of right, you must state that fact on the form provided. If you wish to be excused for another reason (such as illness), you must state that reason and the County Registrar will make a decision as to whether or not you may be excused. In court All the jury members summonsed that are not excused must attend in court on the first day the panel is formed. The name of every juror is called out and you must answer to show you are in attendance. In order to select a panel of 12 jurors for a particular case, names are drawn out of a ballot box. If your name is called, you will go to the jury box and you will be given an opportunity to state if you are ineligible for or disqualified from jury service or if you know any of the witnesses in the case.

Section 23 of the Courts and Civil Law (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 2013 amended the Juries Act 1976 so that the jury can consist of up to 15 members, if the case is expected to last more than 2 months. Even though you are called for jury service, you may not actually serve. Usually more people than necessary are called. You must return to court every day, whether or not you are sworn onto a jury panel, unless otherwise directed by the court. Before you give your oath, either side in the case may challenge you. This is simply an objection to a proposed juror. Each side may challenge 7 potential jurors without giving any reason and may challenge any number of jurors if they can "show cause". If you are challenged without reason being given, you will leave the jury box. If you are challenged with reason, it is the judge who decides whether or not you will serve. The members of the jury who have been selected will individually swear an oath or affirm that they will properly try the issue and give a true verdict according to the evidence. When the jury is sworn in and before the case starts, it will select a foreman from its members.

The foreman acts as an informal chairperson and spokesperson of the jury. Payment on jury service There is no payment for jury service. Travelling expenses are not allowed. If you are actually serving as a juror, lunch will be provided on the day or days that the trial is at hearing. If you are self-employed and work alone and where your attendance at jury service may mean you cannot earn a living, you may qualify for excusal from jury service. Contact the jury office of the Court for more information. If you are signing on for a Jobseeker's payment you will continue to be paid, but you should advise your local Social Welfare Office that you have been called for jury service. If you are in employment, the Juries Act 1976 ( Section 29 ) places a duty on your employer to allow you attend for jury service. It is further specified in the law that time spent on jury service is to be treated as if the employee were actually employed. In other words, if you are in employment and are attending for jury service, you are entitled to be paid while you are away from work.

Anyone with a contract of employment (i.e., temporary workers, contract workers, etc.) is entitled to be paid by their employer while they are on jury service. There should also be no loss of any other employment rights while you serve on a jury. The Jury office will provide a certificate of attendance on request. If you feel your employment rights have been infringed or you have lost employment rights while serving on a jury, you can make a complaint to the Workplace Relations Commission using the online complaint form available on workplacerelations.ie . Read more about enforcing your employment rights here. Further information For more information about juries and jury duty contact: Courts Service JURY TRIAL | The Handbook of Texas Online| Texas State Historical Association (TSHA) Texas State Historical Association (TSHA) Site JURY TRIAL JURY TRIAL. The petit (petty or small) jury is distinguished from the grand jury in Anglo-American law both by its name and by its function. Both are groups of local citizens who perform their responsibilities under oath in accordance with traditions derived from the continental inquest. The concept of jury trial is ancient, but its origins are obscure. The English trial jury dates from the early thirteenth century and was used initially in criminal cases.

This common law jury consisted of adult males of the vicinity from whence the accusation or dispute arose, and a verdict of twelve was necessary to determine guilt of an accused person or to determine civil liability. A verdict was reached in large measure by the jurymen's own knowledge of the law and facts. From the fifteenth century juries were instructed in the law by the judge, and it was not until the seventeenth century that juries tended to become impartial finders of fact. In English America the jury in some civil matters consisted of less than twelve members, but for criminal purposes the number was twelve. Through the eighteenth century in English America, in many criminal cases the jury found both fact and law. Although trial jury is one of the principal hallmarks of the Anglo-American legal system, in England it has virtually disappeared for civil purposes. Stephen F. Austin 's Anglo-American colonists in Texas used the jury for both civil and criminal purposes, but the jury ordinarily did not consist of twelve men. The Anglo Texans were instrumental in having a provision included in the Constitution of Coahuila and Texas (1827) that allowed the legislature to provide for jury trial of criminal matters and eventually in civil cases.

The state's judiciary act of 1827 did not so provide, however, and jury trials were therefore discontinued among the Anglo Texans. In 1830 the state legislature passed a bill for jury trial by seven jurors in Texas criminal cases, but the bill was effectively vetoed by the governor when he returned it to the legislature with recommendations for revision. At least one jury trial was, nevertheless, held in Texas on the assumption that the bill had been enacted. A jury of twelve with eight votes necessary for a verdict was instituted for Texas in 1834, and for criminal cases a verdict of twelve was provided by the Constitution of the Republic of Texas . In 1843 Texas extended jury trial to matters of equity to which it did not apply at common law. For matters of common law the jury of twelve became a matter of right under the Constitution of 1845 . That constitutional rule was construed to mean that a jury trial of twelve was required only in those situations when required under Anglo-American common law.

Thus, for some purposes for which a jury trial was not required at common law, a smaller jury may be used (as in the case of the jury of six in the probate courts) or jury trial may be statutorily forbidden (as in certain instances of determining the validity of marriage of minors). When trial by jury is appropriate, it may be demanded in a civil case by either party or it may be waived by both parties. In criminal cases a jury trial is automatically accorded to the accused. A jury of twelve is impaneled in the district courts, while a jury of six is used ordinarily in county and other inferior courts. Though Texas juries were once impaneled from a body of free, male citizens over twenty-one years of age, with certain other restrictions with respect to literacy, character, interest in the dispute, and property holding, many of these limitations have been abandoned. Women have sat on juries since 1955 and property qualifications were removed in 1969.

Release from jury duty for broad categories of persons (such as clergy, public officeholders, physicians, and lawyers) was significantly limited in 1971, and the minimum age for jurors was reduced to eighteen in 1973. In selecting a jury of twelve from the panel called by lot, each party to a civil trial is allowed six challenges without cause and an unlimited number of challenges for cause. In criminal trials the number of challenges without cause are generally more numerous and depend on the seriousness of the offense charged, but challenges cannot be made on the ground of race or sex. The most common challenge is one for biased views with respect to the facts or the parties. In the course of the trial and in charging the jury, the judge may not comment on the evidence. In civil cases the judge charges the jury to find the facts in dispute based on the evidence presented, and according to the facts found by the jury the court renders judgment. As an aid to understanding testimony, juries elsewhere are sometimes allowed to leave the courtroom to view a scene or some object that cannot be brought into the courtroom, but this procedure of juryviews is not allowed in Texas.

In criminal trials the jury is charged to find a verdict of guilty or not guilty, and all verdicts of guilty in felony cases must be unanimous. A jury that cannot achieve unanimity is termed a "hung jury," and a new trial may be had. Whereas in English law sentencing was always left to the judge, a Texas statute of 1846 allowed the jury to sentence except in capital cases or if the penalty was fixed by law. In 1857 the first of these restrictions was removed, and the jury was also allowed to suspend sentence. With the revision of the Code of Criminal Procedure in 1965, a two stage procedure was instituted for criminal trials under which the questions of guilt and punishment (in the event of a verdict of guilty) are presented to the jury at two separate hearings. In a misdemeanor case if no more than three jurors have been discharged, a guilty verdict may be delivered by as few as nine members. In civil cases since 1973 a verdict may be rendered by ten members of the jury. BIBLIOGRAPHY: Jack Pope, "The Jury," Texas Law Review 39 (1961). Charles S.

Potts, "Early Criminal Law in Texas: From Civil Law to Common Law, to Code," Texas Law Review 21 (April 1943). Joseph W. McKnight What Should I Know About Serving on a Jury? What Should I Know About Serving on a Jury? Does the State Bar offer basic consumer guides on other topics? © 2005, 2010 The State Bar of California. No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any medium, without prior written permission. Introduction You have been summoned for jury duty. It may seem like an inconvenience. It may conflict with your vacation plans. You may worry about its impact on your job. But keep in mind that jury service is a rare opportunity to make a difference, to serve your community and to play a crucial role in America’s system of justice. For Americans, trial by jury is a basic constitutional right. The roots of our jury system span back to Medieval Europe. In the 9th Century, for example, groups of “disinterested neighbors” determined property rights.

In the 17th Century, a “jury of neighbors” would present evidence to prove the “wrongdoing” or “good character” of the accused. In our current system, jurors are simply asked to keep an open mind, weigh evidence presented to them in court—and try to reach a verdict. Today, three out of four Americans believe the jury system is the most fair method of determining guilt or innocence in criminal cases, according to an American Bar Association survey. Another survey found that a large majority of federal judges say they would prefer to have a jury rather than a judge decide their case if they were ever on trial. This guide will provide you with an overview of California’s jury system—the eligibility requirements, the state’s “one-day or one-trial” system and the basic trial process. We hope it helps you understand the jury’s vital role in our justice system and what is expected of you, the prospective juror. 1. Who is eligible to serve on a jury? Any U.S. citizen who: Is at least 18 years old. Is able to understand English. Lives within the court’s jurisdiction.

Has not been convicted of a felony or malfeasance while in public office (unless his or her civil rights have been restored by, for example, a pardon). Is not under a conservatorship. Is not on active military duty. Is not on a grand jury or another trial jury. There are no educational or skill requirements. Juries are made up of people from all walks of life; they are supposed to reflect the community. Jurors are asked to remain impartial during the trial, weigh the evidence presented to them, apply the applicable law and attempt to reach a verdict. 2. How are potential jurors picked? They are randomly selected from sources that may include various lists, such as voter registration lists and lists of licensed drivers and identification cardholders (from the Department of Motor Vehicles). Once summoned to court, prospective jurors make up the panels from which trial juries are chosen. 3. If I report for jury service, will I definitely serve on a jury? No, not necessarily. Jury duty summons are sent out to more individuals than will be needed. This is because some people are automatically excused and others may be excused during the jury selection process. 4. How often can I be summoned for jury service?

No more than once in a 12-month period. This is because California has a “one-day or one-trial” jury service system. If you are not chosen to serve on a jury during your first day of service, you will be excused from any further jury service for at least a year. If you are put on a jury, you will be expected to serve until the trial’s end. In California, most jury trials are completed within a week. Then you would be excused from jury service for at least a year. If you are summoned back sooner, contact the court. 5. If I receive a summons for jury duty, do I have to respond? Yes. For the system to work, citizens must respond when summoned for jury service. Even if you may not qualify for service, you must respond to the summons. If you do not, you could be held in contempt of court and be fined and/or sent to jail. If you cannot serve on the summons date, you may ask for one postponement to a more convenient time. (Read the summons from your particular court to find out how to respond in your county.) In addition, students may request a postponement to the next school break. 6.

If I have a good excuse, can I get out of jury service? It depends. Jury service is not voluntary. It is a responsibility of citizenship and the law only allows you to be excused for certain reasons. For example, you might be excused if jury service would place an undue hardship on you or the public, or for certain other reasons (see #7). Or, if you do not meet the general eligibility requirements for jury service or you are a peace officer or you have been placed under a conservatorship, you may be disqualified or temporarily excused from service. 7. Why would a judge excuse someone from jury service? Judges can excuse prospective jurors for various reasons. The individual may have: Immediate family members related to someone involved in the case. A financial interest in the case. A prejudice or bias. Formed an opinion about the case. And, as mentioned previously, judges can excuse individuals if serving on the jury would be an undue hardship for the individual or the public. 8. What happens during the jury selection process? This process is also called voir dire. A panel of prospective jurors is randomly selected, sent to a courtroom and given an oath to tell the truth.

From that panel, a smaller group is seated in the jury box for questioning. The judge and attorneys assigned to the case then ask questions to determine the prospective jurors’ qualifications and suitability. The judge may excuse some individuals. The lawyers may then request that additional prospective jurors be excused for cause. (This means that the individual may be excused for a specific reason, such as a bias.) The attorneys also are allowed a limited number of peremptory challenges. This means that attorneys on each side can, without giving any reason, ask that particular jurors be excused. 9. How many jurors serve on a jury? In California, trial juries are generally made up of 12 jurors. In civil trials and in criminal cases involving a misdemeanor (a lesser criminal charge), however, there may be fewer than 12 jurors if both sides agree to it. 10. Can my employer refuse to give me time off for jury service? No, not legally. Nor can your employer harass or fire you for responding to jury service (as long as you have given him or her reasonable advance warning). There are also laws allowing students to be excused from their classes to meet their civic duty and show up for jury service. 11.

Will I be paid anything for serving as a juror? Yes, but not much. Beginning on the second day of service, the county will pay you at least $15 a day (unless your government or public employer continues to pay you during your jury service). You also would be entitled to 34 cents a mile in mileage costs one way after your first day of jury service. 12. What happens if I am not chosen to serve on a jury? If you are not chosen as a juror during your first day of service, you will be excused and usually cannot be summoned back for jury duty for at least a year. If you are summoned back sooner, contact the court. 13. If I am picked for a jury, what will be expected of me? You will be expected to weigh the evidence presented to you. This could involve judging the facts and deciding whether or not the witnesses are believable. You also will be expected to follow the judge’s instructions. You will not, however, be expected—nor will you be allowed—to do any outside research on your own. The case might involve a civil lawsuit—a consumer suing a business, for example, or a patient accusing a doctor of malpractice.

Or, the trial might involve criminal charges—a person accused of robbing or even killing someone, for example. Either way, you will be asked to keep an open mind and to avoid forming any opinions until you have weighed all of the evidence in the case. 14. During the trial, can I talk about the case with anyone outside court? No. In fact, you can’t even discuss the case with your fellow jurors until the jury deliberations at the end of the trial. Nor can you talk to the lawyers, witnesses or anyone else connected to the case. 15. What happens during a trial? Trials can take many unexpected twists and turns. You, as a juror, may even be excluded from certain discussions and hearings during the trial. Generally, however, trials follow this process: In opening statements, the plaintiff’s attorney (in a civil case) or the prosecutor (in a criminal case) explains what he or she expects to prove in the trial. He or she may point to certain evidence that will be presented during the trial. The defense attorney may—or may not—choose to give an opening statement as well. Or, he or she could wait until later in the trial to offer the defense version of the case.

The plaintiff’s attorney or the prosecutor then calls witnesses and presents evidence. The witnesses in a criminal trial might include, for example, someone who saw the crime take place, the detective who investigated the case or an expert witness who could explain scientific evidence and establish (or discount) its reliability. Defense attorneys would have a chance to question the witnesses as well. After the plaintiff’s attorney or the prosecutor rests (finishes presenting evidence) the defense attorney may present evidence to counter the accusations against the defendant. However, keep in mind that it is up to the plaintiff or prosecutor to prove a defendant’s guilt. In our justice system, the accused is always “innocent until proven guilty.” After the attorneys rest their case, both sides will present final arguments. In the final arguments, the attorneys can give their views on what the trial evidence has—or has not—proven. Again, the plaintiff’s attorney (or prosecutor) goes first. There may also be rebuttal arguments. The judge instructs the jury on the applicable law and the verdicts that the jury could reach in the case. The jury moves to the jury room for deliberations. After choosing a jury foreperson, the jury weighs the trial evidence and attempts to reach a verdict. 16.

Where can I find out more about serving on a jury? Visit the California Courts website at courtinfo.ca.gov/jury. Some counties provide juror information on their county websites as well. 17. Does the State Bar offer basic consumer guides on other topics? Yes. The State Bar produces pamphlets and guides on a variety of basic legal topics to help you—the consumer—better understand the law and your rights. The State Bar’s Get the Legal Facts of Life pamphlet series addresses topics ranging from divorce, domestic violence and estate planning to your rights as a renter or employee. There are also State Bar guides that can provide you with basic overviews of those laws applicable to seniors, parents or teenagers who are coming of age. Visit the bar’s website at calbar.ca.gov where you’ll find the publications and details on ordering complimentary copies. Or send an e-mail to pamphlets@calbar.ca.gov . If you don’t have access to the Internet, call 1-888-875-LAWS (888-875-5297) for information on ordering the publications by mail. The purpose of this pamphlet is to provide general information on the law, which is subject to change.

If you have a specific legal problem, you may want to consult a lawyer. The State Bar of California Office of Media & Information Services 180 Howard Street

Question: Inquest juries in England must consist of a minimum of how many members?
Answer: Seven