Tuesday, September 11, 2007
“No other trial should or could really proceed pending the outcome of this judicial review”
The introduction of a new methodology for assessing whether to use non-jury trials in Northern Ireland courts [with added sunset clause - Ed] has hit a snag. It’s reported that defence lawyers are not being given sufficient information about potential jurors before selecting a jury and in a case in Coleraine the defence team have sought a judicial review on what would appear to be an open-and-shut issue - if there is no risk to potential jurors then there’s no need for information to be withheld.. and if there is a risk…
Pete Baker @ 06:13 PM
This issue isn’t really directly linked to the end of Diplock Courts - though dealt with in the same legislation. It deals with all cases.
I can’t really see why anyone needs to know the identity of jurors?
D
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 06:48 AMDenis I agree. The offender may have all sorts of connections and we should not risk disclosing too much to them. The defence probably does not view defending jurors against retribution as part of his/ her job. Being a juror is a big enough pain without having the scum of the universe landing up on your doorstep.
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 08:08 AMDefence lawyers need some minimal information in order to select an objective jury, information on profession is particularly important in this. It is totally unreasonable to leave them totally in the dark.
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 09:24 AMLawyers do not need information to select an objective jury they need it to select a subjective jury hence why its loss is so lamented!
Posted by on Sep 12, 2007 @ 01:25 PM
