The Process of Qualifying, Being Selected and Appointed as a Lay Magistrate in the UK

1720 Words4 Pages
bulb-icon

Recommended: The selection process of lay magistrates essay

To qualify as a magistrate, the candidate must be between 18 and 65 years old, they do not have to be a British national but must swear allegiance to the queen. Legal training/experience is not required or any recognised qualifications as legal advisors are available to advise magistrates on the law. Magistrates must have good health in order to be able to carry out necessary duties. Magistrates must also be financially secure; if they are an undischarged bankrupt they will not be appointed as a magistrate. Policemen, members of the armed forces, traffic wardens, members of or candidates for election to any parliament of assembly, or any other careers that could conflict with the role of a magistrate will be regarded as incompatible. Potential magistrates with criminal convictions or civil court orders must declare these on their application form. Minor offences such as motoring offences are not an issue but serious offences such as murder may lead to the candidate being rejected. The selection process for a lay magistrate has a number of stages. Firstly, it will start off via advertisements such as posters, part of a local campaign in the community by a committee. Potential Magistrates will then have to fill in an application form which will then be checked by a government department like the Ministry of Justice (depending what country you are in). If they are eligible, they will be invited by the Advisory Committee which consists of local citizens and some magistrates. If their first interview is successful, they will be called back for a second interview. In the second interview, they will discuss examples of cases that magistrates deal with, background checks are made for conflicts of interest, the Advisory Committee wil... ... middle of paper ... ...embers of the public are involved. • Better arbiter than a judge; Judge may only see defendant as a convict while jury sees defendant as 1 of them so may be more open-minded than the judge. Disadvantages of using a jury in the criminal process could be: • Jury is possibly full of 12 strangers who have no legal training/experience or even any legal knowledge. • Jury equity can also be a disadvantage as jury can reach a perverse decision which is not justified. • Juries deliberate in private and no one can possibly know how they reached their verdict. Secrecy of jury means that no way of knowing if jury understood case and came to decision for right reasons. • Certain Jurors may be racially biased and no one would know as juries do not have to give reasons on why/how they came up with their verdict. • Juries are more expensive than trial by judge or magistrate.

Show More
Related

  • Dbq Essay On The Jury System

    921 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the Jury system mini Q document A, the second chart shows that in around 2300 jury trials only around 300 people are Acquitted, while in Bench trials about a third of the people are acquitted. This shows that the jury system works a far larger percentage of the time while the bench trial lets a lot of people go. In the Jury system mini Q document C, John Gastil says “the framers of the United states Constitution viewed the jury system as a critically important feature.” This shows that the framers had originally intended for there to be a trial by jury for every case in order for democracy to shine through and be the leading form of government that our country

    Read More

  • Australia's Unfair Legal System

    821 Words  | 2 Pages

    I believe that the jury system is an unfair system due to the limitations which are included during jury selection. Many professionals and groups of people are exempt from jury service: police or anyone dealing with the law (law student, lawyer, judges, assessors), anyone dealing in medicine (doctors, nurses), small or large business owners Pregnant women or women in general can claim special considerations, along with; teachers, accountants, ministers of religion, or generally anyone with a professional/education. So due to this, people who serve on a jury can be unemployed or part of a less educated and informed strata of society.

    Read More

  • The Judicial Process and Batson Case

    2726 Words  | 6 Pages

    Despite the efforts of lawyers and judges to eliminate racial discrimination in the courts, does racial bias play a part in today’s jury selection? Positive steps have been taken in past court cases to ensure fair and unbiased juries. Unfortunately, a popular strategy among lawyers is to incorporate racial bias without directing attention to their actions. They are taught to look for the unseen and to notice the unnoticed. The Supreme Court in its precedent setting decision on the case of Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986), is the first step to limiting racial discrimination in the court room. The process of selecting jurors begins with prospective jurors being brought into the courtroom, then separating them into smaller groups to be seated in the jury box. The judge and or attorneys ask questions with intent to determine if any juror is biased or cannot deal with the issues fairly. The question process is referred to as voir dire, a French word meaning, “to see to speak”. During voir dire, attorneys have the right to excuse a juror in peremptory challenges. Peremptory challenges are based on the potential juror admitting bias, acquaintanceship with one of the parties, personal knowledge of the facts, or the attorney believing he/she might not be impartial. In the case of Batson v. Kentucky, James Batson, a black man, was indicted for second-degree burglary and receipt of stolen goods. During the selection of the jury the prosecutor used his peremptory challenges to strike out all of the four black potential jurors, leaving an all white jury. Batson’s attorney moved to discharge the venire, the list from which jurors may be selected, on the grounds that the prosecutor’s peremptory challenges violated his client’s Sixth and Fourteenth Amendment rights to have a jury derived from a “cross-section of the community”(People v. Wheeler, 583 P.3d 748 [Calif. 1978]). The circuit court ruled in favor of the prosecutor and convicted Batson on both counts. This case went through the courts and finalized in the U.S. Supreme Court.

    Read More

  • Argumentative Essay On 12 Angry Men

    531 Words  | 2 Pages

    In America, every individual has the right to a fair trial, but how fair is the trial? When an individual is on trial, his or her life is on the line, which is decided by twelve strangers. However, who is to say that these individuals take their role seriously and are going to think critically about the case? Unfortunately, there is no way to monitor the true intentions of these individuals and what they feel or believe. In the movie, Twelve Angry Men, out of the twelve jurors’ only one was willing to make a stance against the others, even though the evidence seemed plausible against the defendant. Nevertheless, the justice system is crucial; however, it is needs be reformed.

    Read More

  • Georgia State Court System

    1956 Words  | 4 Pages

    ... diploma, and must be a county resident for at least one year. Position of magistrate is gained either through appointment or partisan countywide election. State court judges are elected through nonpartisan countywide elections and must be a county resident. They must be at least 25 years of age, have 7 years experience practicing law, and be a state resident for a minimum of 3 years. Superior Court judges are required to have 7 years experience practicing law, be a circuit resident, be a state resident for a minimum of 3 years, and be no younger than 30. Superior court judges are elected in nonpartisan countywide elections.

    Read More

  • The History of Juries

    590 Words  | 2 Pages

    In the United States, jury trials are an important part of our court system. We rely heavily on the jury to decide the fate of the accused. We don’t give a second thought to having a jury trial now, but they were not always the ‘norm’.

    Read More

  • The Criminal Trial Process

    1065 Words  | 3 Pages

    They are the impartial third-party whose responsibility is to deliver a verdict for the accused based on the evidence presented during trial. They balance the rights of society to a great extent as members of the community are involved. This links the legal system with the community and ensures that the system is operating fairly and reflecting the standards and values of society. A trial by jury also ensures the victim’s rights to a fair trial. However, they do not balance the rights of the offender as they can be biased or not under. In the News.com.au article ‘Judge or jury? Your life depends on this decision’ (14 November 2013), Ian Lloyd, QC, revealed that “juries are swayed by many different factors.” These factors include race, ethnicity, physical appearance and religious beliefs. A recent study also found that juries are influenced by where the accused sits in the courtroom. They found that a jury is most likely to give a “guilty” verdict if the accused sits behind a glass dock (ABC News, 5 November 2014). Juries also tend to be influenced by their emotions; hence preventing them from having an objective view. According to the Sydney Morning Herald article ‘Court verdicts: More found innocent if no jury involved’ (23 November 2013), 55.4 per cent of defendants in judge-alone trials were acquitted of all charges compared with 29 per cent in jury trials between 1993 and 2011. Professor Mark Findlay from the University of Sydney said that this is because “judges were less likely to be guided by their emotions.” Juries balance the rights of victims and society to a great extent. However, they are ineffective in balancing the rights of the offender as juries can be biased which violate the offender’s rights to have a fair

    Read More

  • The Jury and Its Role in the Courts of Trial

    1507 Words  | 4 Pages

    The jury plays a crucial role in the courts of trial. They are an integral part in the Australian justice system. The jury system brings ordinary people into the courts everyday to judge whether a case is guilty or innocent. The role of the jury varies, depending on the different cases. In Australia, the court is ran by an adversary system. In this system “..individual litigants play a central part, initiating court action and largely determining the issues in dispute” (Ellis 2013, p. 133). In this essay I will be discussing the role of the jury system and how some believe the jury is one of the most important institutions in ensuring that Australia has an effective legal system, while others disagree. I will evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of a jury system.

    Read More

  • The Criminal Trial Process

    1108 Words  | 3 Pages

    A jury is a panel of citizens, selected randomly from the electoral role, whose job it is to determine guilt or innocence based on the evidence presented. The Jury Act 1977 (NSW) stipulates the purpose of juries and some of the legal aspects, such as verdicts and the right of the defence and prosecution to challenge jurors. The jury system is able to reflect the moral and ethical standards of society as members of the community ultimately decide whether the person is guilty or innocent. The creation of the Jury Amendment Act 2006 (NSW) enabled the criminal trial process to better represent the standards of society as it allowed majority verdicts of 11-1 or 10-2, which also allowed the courts to be more resource efficient. Majority verdicts still ensure that a just outcome is reached as they are only used if there is a hung jury and there has been considerable deliberation. However, the role of the media is often criticized in relation to ensuring that the jurors remain unbiased as highlighted in the media article “Independent Juries” (SMH, 2001), and the wide reporting of R v Gittany 2013 supports the arguments raised in the media article. Hence, the jury system is moderately effective in reflecting the moral and ethical standards of society, as it resource efficient and achieves just outcomes, but the influence of the media reduces the effectiveness.

    Read More

  • Psychologists In The Criminal Justice System Case Study

    1450 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...he selection of jurors by race, gender, age, etc. The point of a jury is to have an unbiased cross-section of the defendant’s peers to evenly judge the crime and the punishment of the offender on trial. Sometimes, the opposing counsel will claim many different things to discredit the decisions or practices of the other side.

    Read More

  • Arguments For and Against Juries

    692 Words  | 2 Pages

    ... In a speech to the House of Lords in 1844 Lord Denman remarked: 'Trial by jury itself, instead of being a security to persons who are accused, will. be a delusion, a mockery and a snare. The question of juror competence remains a recurrent feature in both the research and policy. literature (Horowitz et al., 1996; Penrod & Heuer, 1997). Indeed, in the. 1998 the Home Office invited commentary on whether an alternative to the traditional jury system was appropriate for cases of serious fraud.

    Read More

  • Importance Of Jury Selection

    2734 Words  | 6 Pages

    The book Acquittal by Richard Gabriel states, “juries are the best judges in the system. They are not elected, they don't have the high-powered microscope of appellate review or the stern, disapproving-schoolmarm precedent looking over their shoulder, and they have no interest in the outcome of the case.” For this reason, we can come to the conclusion that the use of juries in a trial is the best for all involved in the legal system. While juries, “are the best judges in the system”, lawyers, jury consultants, and jury scientists are the reasons they are viewed this way. It is their job to make sure that not only their client, but everyone has a fair and unbiased trial.Making sure that “the best judges in the system” are fair and unbiased takes a lot of planning, research, and effort. You must research the jurors, understand how they think, what their morals are, and how they would view this case. “It is a constructed reality, cobbled together by shifting memories of witnesses, attorney arguments, legal instructions, personal experiences, and beliefs of jurors.”(Gabriel

    Read More

  • Forensic Psychologist In Jury Selection Process

    951 Words  | 2 Pages

    (Greene & Heilbrun, 2014) Several months before a trial, consultants start the process of jury selection; random people are chosen and are presented with the lawyer’s intentions. Consultants may utilize the nearby telephone directory and call arbitrary individuals to get some information about their age, race, sex, religion, job, and political perspectives. (Hutson, 2007) Afterwards they conduct focus groups, where they test parts of their case specific contentions, bits of proof, or witnesses and every so often consultants arrange mock trials with the lawyers. The method know as peremptory challenges is when both sides are allowed to exclude an assigned number of planned jurors without a reason expressed, without request, and without being liable to the court's control. The quantity of peremptory challenges assigned to every side varies, depending on the case and charge. (Greene & Heilburn, 2014) Consultants analyze their reactions to see what characteristics are essential in a specific trial, while taking into account these discoveries, consultants create questionnaire’s and procedures to select jurors most proper. (Hutson,

    Read More

  • The Argument For The Bench Trial

    1323 Words  | 3 Pages

    ...ast bit informed before being chosen than should someone so ignorant really be serving in the courthouse on the jury?

    Read More

  • The Importance Of The Criminal Justice System In Twelve Angry Men

    1091 Words  | 3 Pages

    “South Africa ditched juries amid fears of racial prejudice among jurors and a reluctance on the part of many people to serve” (Fuchs), which most likely brings up the problem we have here in the U.S. Law professor Peter Van Koppen provides a perfect example of a common situation and compares it to our criminal justice system which sums up my stance on the ruling out of jury trials in the U.S., “Van Koppen pointed out that you wouldn 't want a panel of lay people acting as doctors. So, why would you want regular people deciding the fate of defendants? The work done by a jury isn’t that different from the work of a scientist like a doctor, he wrote. ““A scientist must make inferences about states of affairs that cannot be observed directly, inferring from the evidence that can be observed. And that is precisely what a jury must do: make a decision about the guilt of the defendant based on the evidence presented at trial. That is a scientific enterprise that surpasses the intellectual aptitude of most laypersons who are called to jury duty””

    Read More

More about The Process of Qualifying, Being Selected and Appointed as a Lay Magistrate in the UK

Open Document