Thread: Jury Duty

Originally Posted by PhilipA

I have been called up twice and proceeded to the stage of empanelment once and been objected off , and the second time I was empanelled but my panel was not selected.
Each time you proceed to the empanelment stage gives you a 5 year exemption.

The first time was quite funny.
I was at the Hmm urinal with a ministerial advisor ( cynical ex copper) and told him I was to do jury duty. He looked at me and said "no chance" . I said why.
He said " You are a middle aged conservative looking white male. There is no chance you will get on a jury".

So I went to the Darling Centre, was ampanelled , we all walked up to Taylor Square for a robbery trial , and I was objected off by the defence lawyer.
It appears that you have to be a 25 year old hippy chick or covered in tats etc to get on a jury.
If you want to appear to do your duty but not have to do it, just have a good haircut, be clean shaven, and wear your best suit and appear totally anal by having three different coloured ballpoints in your top pocket. This is especially valid if you are at least 40 years old and a WASP male. LOL
Regards Philip A

Never fails - prosecutor and defence will leap up to object. If you want to never be selected again ask the jury's Court Attendant or a Sheriff's Officer if you can send a note to His Honour asking if jurors can ask questions directly.

Here's how it is supposed to work in NSW, lots of good info in this - shame it can be thwarted.:

Outline of trial procedure — Judicial Commission of New South Wales

Empanelling the jury

Provisions concerning the jury are found in the Jury Act 1977.

A jury panel is summoned by the sheriff and brought into court when required.

It is suggested that before the panel is brought into court the judge discusses with counsel matters that should be raised with the panel at the outset because they may impact upon a juror’s willingness to perform his or her duty, such as the length of the trial, pre-trial publicity and the particular nature of the charge.

The judge can determine whether to excuse any person in the panel: s 38 Jury Act. Generally the sheriff’s officer will bring written applications for excusal to the judge for approval. The judge can determine to have the prospective juror make the application in person after the panel is brought into court.

It is suggested that the trial judge inquire of the panel whether any person wishes to be excused for some reason, even though an application may have been refused by the sheriff, based on any matter raised with counsel or otherwise. For example, the jury should be informed that the proceedings will be in English, the sitting times of the court and the need for attendance every day. It is a matter for the judge whether the prospective juror should be sworn or not when seeking to be excused.

It is possible to challenge the array before empanelment but this is very rarely done: s 41 Jury Act. This is a challenge against the processes of the sheriff in selecting the panel.

If pre-trial rulings have been made pursuant to s 130(2) the accused is to be arraigned again on the indictment before the jury panel: s 130(3); DS v R [2012] NSWCCA 159 at [63]. Otherwise there is no necessity for the accused to be re-arraigned before the jury, although it is common practice to do so: see R v Janceski (2005) 64 NSWLR 10.

After the accused is arraigned before the panel but before the selection of jurors, the judge requests the Crown to inform the jurors on the panel of the nature of the charge, the identity of the accused and of the principal witnesses to be called for the prosecution: s 38 Jury Act, see [1-460]. The defence counsel can be asked whether there is any matter that should be raised with the jury, such as the names of defence witnesses.

As to the procedure for assumed identities of prosecution witnesses before the jury panel, see [1-455]ff.

The judge calls on the jurors in the panel to apply to be excused if they consider that they are not able to give impartial consideration to the case in light of what the prosecutor has said, and in particular whether a potential juror may know a witness personally: s 37(8) Jury Act. The judge hears from each juror who raises a question about his or fitness as a juror and decides whether there is any need to discharge him or her. Where the juror indicates that he or she knows a witness, counsel should be asked to clarify firstly, whether the person who the juror knows is a witness and secondly whether the juror should be disqualified by reason of his or her knowledge of or relationship with the witness.

The jurors are selected by secret ballot in open court: s 48 Jury Act. The selection of the potential jurors is performed by the judge’s associate withdrawing cards from the box provided. The jurors are referred to only by numbers given to them by the sheriff. The parties have no right to the names or any other personal information of prospective jurors: R v Ronen [2004] NSWCCA 176. As to the selection of the jury generally and challenges, see Pt 7 Jury Act and [1-460]ff. See also Criminal Practice and Procedure NSW at [7-450], [29-50,725]; Criminal Law (NSW) at [5-3970].

As to the number of jurors and the selection of additional jurors where necessary, see s 19 Jury Act and [1-440].

A challenge can be made by the accused or the legal representative: s 44 Jury Act. Defence counsel will usually ask to be permitted to assist the accused, and permission is inevitably given. The challenges are made before the juror is sworn, usually before being handed the bible.

Practices as to empanelling can vary. One method is that the jury be advised that they will be permitted to take an oath or an affirmation as to the conduct of his or her duties as a juror. They should also be advised as to the right of the parties to challenge particular jurors. The twelve prospective jurors are called into the box. The accused is informed of the right to challenge by the clerk of arraigns. The court attendant offers the bible to the prospective juror in a manner to give time for a challenge to be made. Once challenged the jury is asked to leave the jury box. Further jurors are called and challenges taken until the required number of jurors is obtained.

After members of the jury have been chosen, the jury is sworn by oath or affirmation: s 72A Jury Act. It is a matter for the practice of the individual judge whether the jury is sworn as a group or individually. It is not necessary for the accused to be arraigned again after the jury is selected: DS v R [2012] NSWCCA 159 at [64]. After the jurors are sworn the balance of the panel is returned to the sheriff and leaves the courtroom.

After the jury is sworn, the accused is given or placed into the charge of the jury by the judge’s associate. This is in effect indicating to the jury the charges in the indictment and the jury’s duty to act according to the evidence. They are also asked to choose a foreperson.

It is suggested that where the indictment contains a number of counts or multiple accused the Crown be requested to provide the jury with a copy of the indictment at this time or shortly thereafter. It can be helpful for the judge in opening for the jury to have a copy of the indictment where there are numerous or complicated charges.

It is suggested that after the jury has been charged, the judge tells the jury that it does not have to elect a foreperson immediately, it can change the foreperson at any time, the major function of the foreperson is to deliver the verdict but he or she can be the person who communicates between the jury and the judge, but the foreperson has not more rights in respect of the conduct of the jury or the determination of the verdict than any other member of the jury.

Where at any time during the trial the accused wishes to plead guilty, he or she should be arraigned again. If there is a plea of guilty to the charge or an included charge and the plea is accepted by the Crown, the jury is to be discharged without giving a verdict: s 157.

After empanelment some judges think it appropriate for the court attendant to give a direction that potential witnesses leave the court and the hearing of the court.

Bob

I got called about 25 years ago. I was able to get out of it as I was moving house before the trial, and if you lived more than 25 kms from the court you could be exempt. This was my case.

In Vic if you have done it you are exempt for the next three years.

I wonder what would happen if someone in the jury had a big night and nodded off during the case.