Announcement

**littlemoo** · 6 March 2005, 07:34 PM

I have been told that if you write to your local MP, they have to reply to you. Therefore when this letter is ready, It would prob be a good idea if everyone who is involved prints off a copy and send it to their local MP, as well as Val sending it to her list of people.
A list of MP's is available here http://www.oultwood.com/localgov/mplist.ph...country=England
I will try and find one with addresses on too, later on.
~Jo
Btw, I will have a read and comment on the letter later, I just wanted to post this while I thought about it.

**webmoo** · 6 March 2005, 07:44 PM

My initial comments:

Para 4 - I'm not sure we should include prescription drugs - this might be seized upon to ridicule the campaign as demanding too much. It would also exclude some people who are on, e.g. prescription pain killers or something, and who are otherwise fully able to participate.

Para 7 - "Any person unable to use this basic technology should not be considered for jury service."
Subject to some regulations - some people are very educated and qualified in their field but are still scared of computers. Perhaps put 'Any person unable to use this basic technology, and who refuses basic training should not be considered for jury service.'

Para 8 - Very good idea.

Para 9 - How to address the return correspondance? Should it be mailed to Val? Should it be emailed to Val? Should it be emailed to myself as webmaster of the forum running the campaign? I really don't know what to put in that bit!
We should probably have a mailing address, email address and fax number to get the best chance of a reply from the most people.

Other than that, I think it's a very good letter. Lets hope this campaign works!

**val lavender** · 6 March 2005, 09:31 PM

Hi everyone

I agree that para four is a tricky one, but I would hope that a persons GP, given their knowledge of the person in question, would be able to judge their suitability.

I have a very good friend who is intelligent, caring and fair, what would,in my opinion, preclude her from jury service is that she has been on a very high dose of Diazapam for nine years, and in her own words "has the attention span of a gnat". I discussed this very issue with her and her own feelings where that she would not be able to follow the thread of an complicted caseand would be very worried if she were to put in such a position

In terms of means of reply I would hope that email responses would be the most common medium. This would allow all Broadcaster members to view all responses and could be done by quoting a thread response address dedicated to such replies.this would also allow members to observe the response time by persons invited to comment on our efforts.

If is felt that a postal address would be an advantage I suggest that we use a PO Box for such matters. I can probably arrange for the use of such a facility if this is felt to be the way to go. Responses could then be scanned and posted [I think] so that all members may view them.

Does anyone still use fax?

Regards

Val

**maria** · 7 March 2005, 08:23 AM

hi all i think this... is great going to para 4 i think what val is meaning that anyone that is taking ilegal drugs should not be allowed on jury service not prescribed drugs altho i do think that some prescribed drugs could do some damage as to the way some people think, i myself when i was on chemo and radio was on very very high doses of some very dangerouse drugs and could not of done jury service because i would not have been able to understand or concentrated some people are on these sort of prescribe drugs on an everday bases so i'm so what between what is in para 4, i also definatley feel these changes should be made good luck with it x

**Towermouse** · 7 March 2005, 09:41 AM

Tried to add to list ? How does one do this?

Charles Clark Home Sec.
David Davies Shadow Home Sec.
Directors of Liberty
Tony Blair
Cherie Blair
Lord Woolf.

**Angel** · 7 March 2005, 11:07 AM

I think Jury service in our Country is fair to a certain extent, though I don't agree with the way they are selected. They just need to improve on the current system which should be common sense and they need to be practical about it.

There are a lot of negative perceptions and beliefs people carry with them when entering a court room. A perfect example would be, even though I hate to say this, is that woman are the worst when being face with other woman victims, as they assume they shouldnt have been in that situation in the first place and would critise in their minds and already made judgements about that person. They may feel sorry for them, but this is not powerful enough, unless one of the jurors have been affected in the same way and want revenge against the offender, (Which is obviously not right).

On the other hand, men tend to be more open to all views, but some still carry a negativity behind them which may sway in favour of a male offender. Everyone sterotypes whether we like it or not, and rarely do people ever listen to the facts or concentrate on the individuals body language. I mean why should they, they are not trained to this in the first place. And the final decision does not effect them, instead they feel empowered by it.

I believe jurors need to go through critical tests which would establish their capability's as a person i.e. senario questions, being faced with difficult choices which would clearly define their characters, beliefs, and ability to make sound decisions. That would be one options, and the other would be to do a general appitute test, and ask them personal questions about themselves, i.e. health. The reason I say this is because there was once a deaf juror who was selected and did not have a clue what was going on! Is this fair?

This needs to be looked at so there is fairness for everyone - but is it possible? Its not just the jury service thats needs to be changed, its the overall Criminal Justice System which needs to be revised. If the CJS was fair in the first place - would we be having this discussion about jury service?

Angel.

**Saffron** · 7 March 2005, 11:24 AM

At my husband's trial, when the judge was summing up, 2 of the jurors (both male) were asleep in their chairs. yet apparently we still do not have grounds for an appeal.

Angel is right, people do have preconceptions when they walk into a courtroom. The most common one in the case of those accused of sex crimes is "well, she [the victim] must be telling the truth if she's here today....."

**val lavender** · 7 March 2005, 11:44 AM

Dear Saffron and Angel

so in terms of your experiances with juries, what do you wish to add or alter about the draft letter and to whom else do you think it should be sent? [with email addresses if possible]

Regards

Val

**webmoo** · 7 March 2005, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by Towermouse@7th March 2005 - 10:41 AM
Tried to add to list ? How does one do this?

Charles Clark Home Sec.
David Davies Shadow Home Sec.
Directors of Liberty
Tony Blair
Cherie Blair
Lord Woolf.

Quoted post

You can't change the document - post in the thread and myself or Val will change it and a new version will go up every few days or as often as is needed/I can get to it.

HTH!

**Snoopyseed** · 7 March 2005, 04:24 PM

Hello everyone long time no see!
I have included a link at the bottom where you can fax your MP for free!

Although I am not participating in discussions any longer (and i do miss that&#33

word has got out about this letter, and i felt the need to have a peek and a bit of a comment.
Firstly hats off to Val Lavender for pursuing this and taking the time and effort to draft up the letter and get everyone involved.

From what i can see in the letter most of it seems quite reasonable but i feel from what i have just seen on the news a few days ago their could be an issue about the prescribed drugs part.
A new report (i know we cant believe everything we see or read on the news but this was from the BBC

)said that there are currently record numbers of people claiming Income Support due to illness the main illnesses being Depression and Back pain.It said that as much as 3 out of every 5 people in some areas are claiming Income Support.So potentially thats a hell of a lot of people on Anti deppresants and painkillers to say the least.Now depending on wether the medications effect a person physically or mentally most people respond very well to medications and can still function normally in society.
This paragraph containg the info on people on prescribed drugs not taking part could perhaps instead say that people on prescribed drugs such as those from the class A range ie Morphine, Diamorphine etc shouldnt be able to participate, as their judegment could be affected.
Also again the paragraph about people who cannot use the basic technology should not be able to participate would cancel out a lot of the population from being on a jury.For example my father has a least 4 degree's he is a very smart man but because he is stuck in his ways he prefers the tradditonal method of doing things and 'will not get sucked into this ridiculous technology era'

But otherwise he would be very good on a jury.

I have also brought up the way the jury system is conducted before as well, mainly with rape trials , but this could also expand to other crimes as well.I felt that the jury should be shown a video of the crime in question to help them to understand fully what the trial will be about.Some people in higher class society still hold many common myths and beleifs about what each crime is about and how it effects victims.If a non biased video or talk was conducted at the beggining of each trail no matter what the crime at least the jury no matter what their individual background would all have an equal understanding of what they are about to take into account when it comes to the crime in question.Some people from different backgrounds and cultures see certain types of crime as normal where as others dont.It is a mixed understanding and not helped by the media.
Maybe a small video or talk of the crime, what is involved, common myths and tabboos around the crime exposed and the impact on victims could be shown/given before the trial actually commences would help get everyone off on the same foot.

This is just my opinion not holy writ

As for the MP's and faxing them, i have faxed my MP for free through a website, here is the link it should work with everyone no matter where you are in the UK.

http://www.faxyourmp.com/

good luck with this!
Blessings
Snoopy

**maria** · 7 March 2005, 06:22 PM

NICE TO SEE YOU BACK snoopyseed what you have wrote makes a lot of sense but the video part i can't see that working to be honest as we all no these sort of crimes are shown on tv all the time, if it worked i would 2nd it straight away, i have spoken to several of my friends about this subject and they all agree that the jury system should be changed like i have said in a previous post, when i did jury service there was all sorts there and some of them were definatley not fit enough to sit on the bench, i wont go into to much detail but there were people there that i would never dream of mixing with, and half of them were half wits what more do i need to say x

**Rights Fighter** · 8 March 2005, 12:09 PM

Re jury service:

I feel that sex crimes are very emotive and I cannot believe that some jury members are not swayed by their own emotions either by their own experiences or the experiences of others who they know and are close to.

I have wondered what the benefits would be if the jury was made up of a panel of expert witnesses, one for each side. This could comprise, depending on the case, medical doctors; gynaecologists; psycologists; etc; who can look at the case dispassionately with little or no prejudice. That way only the basic "facts" of the case should be argued without jury members having to be responsible for a case where the evidence turns on the word of the complainant. The judge often tells them that it is they who have to decide "who is telling the truth".

I would suggest that all medical records and evidence is turned over to the medical doctors; the same concept for gynaecology and psycology reports and whatever else is required in expert testimony.

I've recently reviewed a case where the complainant had injuries to her nether regions which were not explained to the jury (her medical file was withheld from the trial). Seven years on (he's still in prison) the medical file reached me for some unknown reason and it transpires she's had two "incomplete miscarriages" which necessitated two "evacuation procedures". I am now on the hunt for a gynaecologist to clarify whether these injuries could have been caused by these procedures.

The weight carried by the evidence of these injuries would have been enormous and the jury had no choice but to come to a guilty verdict.

The complainant obviously didn't find it necessary to inform the jury of these "operations" even though the "injuries" were discussed in detail at trial. If she had nothing to hide, why did not not explain them?

Time for a change I think!

**Snoopyseed** · 8 March 2005, 02:55 PM

Originally posted by maria@7th March 2005 - 07:22 PM
NICE TO SEE YOU BACK snoopyseed
Quoted post

Aww thanks,

Im always around, i do pop in now and then and will occasionally come in to say a bit here and there, as this is a worthwhile cause i felt that i should say my bit

Im always still here for anyone that wants to chat anytime as well, my email addy is with the webmasters so anyone is welcome to contact me if they so wish,

Im just at a stage in my life where i need to be in a caring environment and surrounded by peaceful people and places , but as mentioned before i will still pop in now and then to see how things are going :P
in the meantime blessings to all...
Snoopy

**Saffron** · 8 March 2005, 04:08 PM

Originally posted by Snoopyseed@8th March 2005 - 03:55 PM
Aww thanks, Im always around, i do pop in now and then and will occasionally come in to say a bit here and there, as this is a worthwhile cause i felt that i should say my bit
Im always still here for anyone that wants to chat anytime as well, my email addy is with the webmasters so anyone is welcome to contact me if they so wish,
Im just at a stage in my life where i need to be in a caring environment and surrounded by peaceful people and places , but as mentioned before i will still pop in now and then to see how things are going :P
in the meantime blessings to all...
Snoopy

Quoted post

Hi Snoopyseed, good to have you back, however briefly. Hope all is well with you.
I'm also glad to see that you still hold strong opinions - I actually miss our debates.

I understand your point about precription drugs, and it has been pointed out to Val already. I am interested in your comment about showing a video about the crime concerned. This would have to be handled extremely delicately in order to ensure a balanced trial. For example, showing a video about a rape victim would surely only bias the jury towards the complainant, and make them feel sympathetic towards her/him.
Perhaps to balance it, a video could be shown of someone who has been wrongly convicted, and has subsequently had their conviction overturned. This might make the jury consider both the nature and seriousness of the alleged offence, and the full impact their decision has on someone's life, and how important it is that they take their responsibility seriously.

Hope you are well,

Saffron

Announcement

Letter regarding Jury Service system changes

Letter regarding Jury Service system changes

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment