Criminal Litigation SGS 18 Juries and Jury Trial

Card Set Information

Author:
billsykes
ID:
210491
Filename:
Criminal Litigation SGS 18 Juries and Jury Trial
Updated:
2013-03-31 08:31:00
Tags:
Criminal Litigation
Folders:

Description:
Criminal Litigation
Show Answers:

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview

The flashcards below were created by user billsykes on FreezingBlue Flashcards. What would you like to do?


  1. Rabinder and Jade are jointly charged with an offence of causing grievous bodilyharm with intent. Rabinder is represented by Ms Atkins and Jade is represented by Mr Price. Rabinder, who appears first on the indictment, intends to give evidence and also call Cleo in his defence. Jade also intends to give evidence and call Sanjiv in her defence.

    In which order will the defendants and witnesses be called to give evidence?

    [A] Rabinder, Jade, Cleo and Sanjiv.

    [B] Rabinder, Cleo, Jade and Sanjiv.

    [C] Cleo, Rabinder, Sanjiv and Jade.

    [D] Sanjiv, Jade, Cleo and Rabinder.
    [B] Rabinder, Cleo, Jade and Sanjiv.
  2. Which of the following potential jurors can serve on a jury?

    i)  George who used to sit as a Crown Court Judge till 1990, when he retired due early due to a bout of ill health

    ii)  Fred who was found guilty of drink driving last year and received a suspended custodial sentence

    iii)  Harry who is aged 69

    iv)  Ian who was sentenced to a custodial sentence for 6 years in 1978

    v)  Carol who is currently on bail for common assault.

    [A]  All of the above.


    [B]  None of the above.


    [C]  i) and iii)


    [D]  ii) and iv).
    [C]  i) and iii) -

    Correct, the CJA 2003 abolished the rules that prevented members of the judiciary from serving as jurors and Harry is aged 69 so he is just within the age limit.
  3. Assuming there are 12 Jurors, in which of the following circumstances would a Judge NOT be justified in discharging the whole jury?

    [A] 5 jurors are seen talking to Prosecution witnesses and when questioned it transpires that they were discussing matters relevant to the trial.

    [B] 2 jurors are discharged from the jury as a result of illness.

    [C] The jury cannot agree on a verdict.

    [D] Prosecuting counsel inadvertently put the Defendant's previous convictions before the jury
    [B] 2 jurors are discharged from the jury as a result of illness.

    Judge not justified in discharging entire jury here because still 10 jurors left on jury and minimum required is 9

    If number falls below 9 then Judge must discharge entire jury.
  4. Walter is charged with an offence of Theft, it is alleged that he stole two bottles
    of whiskey from Safeway store. He elected Crown Court trial. The trial took place
    at Gladbury Crown Court. At 2.00pm on the first day of the trial the jury retired to
    consider their verdict. At 4.10pm the Judge gave the jury a majority verdict
    direction. The jury were unable to reach a verdict and were asked to return the
    next day to continue their deliberations. At 12.30pm the next day the jury are still
    unable to reach a decision.

    Which one of the following is a course of action the Judge can follow?











    [A] Give a Watson direction to the jury telling them that he will allow them one further hour within which time they must come to a decision.

    [B] Discharge the jury and direct that the Defendant be formally acquitted.

    [C] Discharge the jury with no further direction.

    [D] Discharge the jury and direct a re-trial. The judge will only order a re-trial if the prosecution invites him/her to.
    [A] Give a Watson direction to the jury telling them that he will allow them one further hour within which time they must come to a decision. Watson direction above wrong because Judge could be seen to be putting pressure on the jury by indicating a time limit.

    [B] Discharge the jury and direct that the Defendant be formally acquitted.The judge can only do this if he has consulted counsel for the prosecution.

    [C] Discharge the jury with no further direction. Correct, as up to prosecution whether they have a re- trial. Can only direct defendant be formally acquitted if prosecution indicate there will be no re-trial.

    [D] Discharge the jury and direct a re-trial. The judge will only order a re-trial if the prosecution invites him/her to.
  5. You are prosecuting the case of Paul Anthony ROBERTS at Gladbury Crown Court. The indictment against the defendant contains three counts, namely Aggravated Vehicle Taking, Driving Whilst Disqualified and Having an Offensive Weapon. Answer the following questions regarding procedural issues which occur during the trial.

    (a)  The defendant does not attend court on day 1 of the trial. What action can the court take? (2 marks)
    The court has a discretion to hear the trial in the absence of the accused.

    If the defendant was on bail, the court may issue a warrant for the defendant’s arrest.
  6. (b)  In the robing room defence counsel approaches you and tells you he wants to raise a legal argument about the admissibility of PC Tompkins’ opinion about the state of the knife when he found it. What is the procedure for dealing with this argument? (3 marks)
    The argument can take place after the jury is sworn and before prosecution counsel makes their opening speech OR

    Prosecution counsel can make their opening speech and call their evidence. At a point before PC Tompkins is called to give evidence,the judge can then be asked to deal with this point of law.

    The legal argument will take place in the absence of the jury.
  7. (c) The defence do not require PC Sidhu to give live evidence. How couldyou present this evidence to the jury? (2 marks)
    Read his witness statement

    Agree a formal admission to reflect the content of his evidence
  8. (d) At the close of the prosecution case the defence make a submission of no case to answer in the absence of the jury. The defence make submissions about the driving allegations and the offensive weapon charge. Assuming the judge allows the submission of the defence in relation to the offensive weapon charge but rejects the defence submission about the driving charges, what will happen when the jury return to court? (3 marks)
    The defendant is to be regarded during the rest of the trial as no longer charged on the offensive weapon allegation.

    The judge can give the jury an explanation for upholding the submission, although it is important that he says nothing which might be construed as saying any remaining counts are well-founded.

    The jury will return their verdict on the driving allegations at the end of the trial, along with the verdict of NG on the direction of the judge in relation to the offensive weapon charge.

What would you like to do?

Home > Flashcards > Print Preview