Janet CollinsJurors – This Isn’t Hollywood
August 7th 2008 11:25
Do we all watch too much American crime drama? That was my first thought when a high profile murder trial was aborted this week. The reason – the jurors were planning to make a visit to the crime scene themselves.
The trial is that of Gordon Wood, alleged to have murdered Carolyn Byrne at the Gap in eastern Sydney in 1995. After only four days in court, the jury was discharged after it became known to the judge that plans were being made by the jurors to visit the crime scene.
It reminded me of another high profile case where jurors took the investigation into their own hands. Back in 2004 in a very public gang rape case, the trial was aborted after it became known that a few jurors had visited the crime scene at night to see for themselves if the defendants could have been identified properly in the darkness.
Jurors should be lectured on the boundaries of their responsibilities. These serious cases cost a lot of money to bring to trial, not to mention the added stress and trauma that victims and their families are subjected to. It seems to be the serious and sensational cases that seem to foster this sort of behaviour; this obsession to step far over the line of responsibility, even breaking the law themselves.
Not all trials inspire such over zealous behaviour in jurors – quite the contrary. In a little known drugs conspiracy trial of two men in June, the jury was discharged and the trial was aborted because some of the jury was not even paying attention to the evidence.
After 66 days in court, the judge was informed that four or five of the jurors had constantly played Sudoku throughout the trial. What the judge, lawyers and court officials had all assumed was extremely diligent note taking by some of the jurors, turned out to be jurors playing Sudoku.
Four or five jurors admitted they had played this throughout at lease half of the trial. It was picked up, not by the judge or lawyers or court officials but by the defendants themselves.
Sounds almost like school doesn’t it?
The trial is that of Gordon Wood, alleged to have murdered Carolyn Byrne at the Gap in eastern Sydney in 1995. After only four days in court, the jury was discharged after it became known to the judge that plans were being made by the jurors to visit the crime scene.
It reminded me of another high profile case where jurors took the investigation into their own hands. Back in 2004 in a very public gang rape case, the trial was aborted after it became known that a few jurors had visited the crime scene at night to see for themselves if the defendants could have been identified properly in the darkness.
Jurors should be lectured on the boundaries of their responsibilities. These serious cases cost a lot of money to bring to trial, not to mention the added stress and trauma that victims and their families are subjected to. It seems to be the serious and sensational cases that seem to foster this sort of behaviour; this obsession to step far over the line of responsibility, even breaking the law themselves.
Not all trials inspire such over zealous behaviour in jurors – quite the contrary. In a little known drugs conspiracy trial of two men in June, the jury was discharged and the trial was aborted because some of the jury was not even paying attention to the evidence.
After 66 days in court, the judge was informed that four or five of the jurors had constantly played Sudoku throughout the trial. What the judge, lawyers and court officials had all assumed was extremely diligent note taking by some of the jurors, turned out to be jurors playing Sudoku.
Four or five jurors admitted they had played this throughout at lease half of the trial. It was picked up, not by the judge or lawyers or court officials but by the defendants themselves.
Sounds almost like school doesn’t it?
| 67 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
