Jury tampering

Last updated

Jury tampering is the crime of unduly attempting to influence the composition or decisions of a jury during the course of a trial. The means by which this crime could be perpetrated can include attempting to discredit potential jurors to ensure they will not be selected for duty. Once selected, jurors could be bribed or intimidated to act in a certain manner on duty. It could also involve making unauthorized contact with them for the purpose of introducing prohibited outside information and then arguing for a mistrial. In the United States, people have also been charged with jury tampering for handing out pamphlets and flyers indicating that jurors have certain rights and obligations, including an obligation to vote their conscience notwithstanding the instructions they are given by the judge. [1]

Contents

Republic of Ireland

In the Republic of Ireland, the Special Criminal Court is a three-judge, juryless court which tries cases based on a majority vote. Use of the Special Criminal Court is restricted to cases where "ordinary courts are inadequate to secure the effective administration of justice", and is allowed for by the Constitution of Ireland. While the power was initially created to prevent court cases being subverted by juries sympathetic to the defendant, the Special Criminal Court was established in 1972 to handle paramilitary cases resulting from the Troubles, when the risk of jury intimidation was high and there had also been a series of light sentences and acquittals by judges and juries sympathetic to the defendants. [2] It has since been used to try cases of high-profile gang leaders and other high-risk non-terrorism cases where normal juries risk intimidation or revenge.

United Kingdom

In Great Britain, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 allows for non-jury trials when there is danger of jury tampering, or where jury tampering has taken place. [3] On 18 June 2009, the Court of Appeal in England and Wales made a landmark ruling that resulted in the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, allowing the first-ever criminal trial to be held without a jury by invoking Section 44 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. The case in question involved four men accused of an armed robbery at Heathrow Airport in February 2004. After three juries either failed to reach verdicts or were discharged, the fourth trial of the case took place before a single judge, and ended on 31 March 2010 with guilty verdicts for all four accused. [4] The UK had previously established non-jury courts in Northern Ireland, known as Diplock Courts.

Levels of jury tampering were reported in 2002 to be a "major problem" by the deputy commissioner of the London Metropolitan Police [5] and in 2003 to be "worryingly high" in Merseyside by the then Chief Constable Norman Bettison and the then Home Secretary David Blunkett. [6]

Cases

See also

Related Research Articles

In jurisprudence, double jeopardy is a procedural defence that prevents an accused person from being tried again on the same charges following an acquittal or conviction and in rare cases prosecutorial and/or judge misconduct in the same jurisdiction. Double jeopardy is a common concept in criminal law - in civil law, a similar concept is that of res judicata. The double jeopardy protection in criminal prosecutions only bars an identical prosecution for the same offence, however, a different offence may be charged on identical evidence at a second trial. Res judicata protection is stronger - it precludes any causes of action or claims that arise from a previously litigated subject matter.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jury trial</span> Type of legal trial

A jury trial, or trial by jury, is a legal proceeding in which a jury makes a decision or findings of fact. It is distinguished from a bench trial in which a judge or panel of judges makes all decisions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jury</span> Group of people to render a verdict in a court

A jury is a sworn body of people (jurors) convened to hear evidence, make findings of fact, and render an impartial verdict officially submitted to them by a court, or to set a penalty or judgment.

Jury nullification (US/UK), jury equity (UK), or a perverse verdict (UK) occurs when the jury in a criminal trial gives a not guilty verdict regardless of whether they believe a defendant has broken the law. The jury's reasons may include the belief that the law itself is unjust, that the prosecutor has misapplied the law in the defendant's case, that the punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, or general frustrations with the criminal justice system. Some juries have also refused to convict due to their own prejudices in favor of the defendant. Such verdicts are possible because a jury has an absolute right to return any verdict it chooses.

A hung jury, also called a deadlocked jury, is a judicial jury that cannot agree upon a verdict after extended deliberation and is unable to reach the required unanimity or supermajority. A hung jury may result in the case being tried again.

Not proven is a verdict available to a court of law in Scotland. Under Scots law, a criminal trial may end in one of three verdicts, one of conviction ("guilty") and two of acquittal.

The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) is a United States national jury education organization, incorporated in the state of Montana as a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. It works to educate citizens on their authority when they serve as jurors. FIJA's stated aims are to educate the public, provide commentary on current jury-related cases, and assist defendants with jury authority strategies — including the right to veto bad laws and the misapplication of laws by refusing to convict the defendant. The organization was formed in 1989 by Larry Dodge, a Montana businessman, and his friend Don Doig. It was formed following discussions about forming such a group at the National Libertarian Party convention in Philadelphia in 1989.

The right of peremptory challenge is a legal right in jury selection for the attorneys to reject a certain number of potential jurors or judges without stating a reason. The idea behind peremptory challenges is that if both parties have contributed in the configuration of the jury, they will find its verdict more acceptable. The use of peremptory challenges is controversial as some feel it has been used to undermine the balanced representation on a jury which would occur using random selection. Many jurisdictions limit or prohibit peremptory challenges.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Special Criminal Court</span> Irish specialist court

The Special Criminal Court is a juryless criminal court in Ireland which tries terrorism and serious organised crime cases.

Witness tampering is the act of attempting to improperly influence, alter or prevent the testimony of witnesses within criminal or civil proceedings.

Diplock courts were criminal courts in Northern Ireland for non-jury trial of specified serious crimes. They were introduced by the Northern Ireland Act 1973 and used for serious and terrorism-related cases during the Troubles. The Justice and Security Act 2007 ended the automatic use of non-jury trials for scheduled offences but they are still used in Northern Ireland upon certification by the Director of Public Prosecutions on a case-by-case basis.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Gene Gotti</span> American mobster

Eugene Gotti is an American mobster and the former captain of the Gambino crime family of New York City. He was sentenced to 50 years in prison in 1989 for racketeering and drug trafficking charges; he was released in 2018.

Jury selection is the selection of the people who will serve on a jury during a jury trial. The group of potential jurors is first selected from among the community using a reasonably random method. Jury lists are compiled from voter registrations and driver license or ID renewals. From those lists, summonses are mailed. A panel of jurors is then assigned to a courtroom.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice Act 2003</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is a wide-ranging measure introduced to modernise many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Large portions of the act were repealed and replaced by the Sentencing Act 2020.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Boško Radonjić</span> Serbian mobster (1943–2011)

Boško Radonjić was a Serbian mobster, former leader of the Westies, a predominantly Irish-American gang based in New York's Hell's Kitchen.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Juries in England and Wales</span> Law of trial by jury in England and Wales

In the legal jurisdiction of England and Wales, there is a long tradition of jury trial that has evolved over centuries. Under present-day practice, juries are generally summoned for criminal trials in the Crown Court where the offence is an indictable offence or an offence triable either way. All common law civil cases were tried by jury until the introduction of juryless trials in the new county courts in 1846, and thereafter the use of juries in civil cases steadily declined. Liability to be called upon for jury service is covered by the Juries Act 1974.

In the United States, jury nullification occurs when a jury in a criminal case reaches a verdict contrary to the weight of evidence, sometimes because of a disagreement with the relevant law. It has its origins in colonial America under British law. The American jury draws its power of nullification from its right to render a general verdict in criminal trials, the inability of criminal courts to direct a verdict no matter how strong the evidence, the Fifth Amendment's Double Jeopardy Clause, which prohibits the appeal of an acquittal, and the fact that jurors cannot be punished for the verdict they return.

Sir Colman Maurice Treacy is a retired Lord Justice of Appeal. Previously, he was a barrister in Birmingham. He presided over a number of criminal trials, including those of an Afghan warlord, Faryadi Sarwar Zardad, and two of the killers of Stephen Lawrence.

A citizen's right to a trial by jury is a central feature of the United States Constitution. It is considered a fundamental principle of the American legal system.

An innominate jury, also known as an anonymous jury, is a jury whose members are kept anonymous by court order. This may be requested by the prosecution or defense in order to protect the jury from the media, potential jury tampering, or social pressure to return a particular verdict.

References

  1. "Jury finds man guilty of jury tampering after passing out juror rights pamphlets". 1 June 2017. Retrieved 15 December 2017.
  2. Ó Faoleán, Gearóid (2019). A Broad Church: The Provisional IRA in the Republic of Ireland, 1969–1980. Merrion Press. pp. 86–88. ISBN   978-1785372452.
  3. CPS (10 January 2008). "Non Jury Trials: Legal Guidance". The Crown Prosecution Service. Retrieved 12 April 2009.
  4. "Gang convicted of Heathrow raid". 31 March 2010 via news.bbc.co.uk.
  5. "Cases of jury tampering soar". Independent. 29 December 2002. Retrieved 11 April 2018.
  6. "Blunkett tackles jury tampering". BBC News. 18 November 2003. Retrieved 12 April 2009.
  7. "Persistence paid off for jailed Dozier", Minden Press-Herald , 23 July 1984, p. 1
  8. "Bill Sherman, "Louisiana ag chiefs: past and present", 3 July 2008" (PDF). ldaf.state.la.us. Archived from the original (PDF) on 29 September 2013. Retrieved 1 May 2013.
  9. "Hoffa faces eight years behind bars". BBC News. 12 March 1964. Retrieved 12 April 2009.
  10. "Ex-Governor of West Virginia Pleads Guilty to Bribing Foreman of His Jury". The New York Times. 30 March 1971. p. 16. Retrieved 12 April 2009.
  11. Lubasch, Arnold H. (7 November 1992). "Juror Is Convicted of Selling Vote to Gotti". The New York Times via NYTimes.com.
  12. "Jury bribe bid sees trial ruling". BBC News. 16 October 2007. Retrieved 12 April 2009.