Criminal Bar Raises Concerns of Loss of Jury Trials in Serious Fraud Cases
13 March 2007
The removal of the ancient right to trial by jury in serious fraud cases was opposed by senior barristers addressing a Parliamentary meeting today.
The Fraud (Trials without a Jury) Bill reaches its 2nd reading stage in the House of Lords on Tuesday 20th March. The Bill would allow trial without jury in complex and/or lengthy fraud cases, if the prosecution made an application to the court. The Lord Chief Justice, or a judge nominated by him, would then be required to give permission for the removal of a jury.
Addressing Peers at a briefing jointly organised with the Law Society, Peter Thornton QC said:
'People trust juries. They are a central part of our justice system. All the evidence shows that juries do understand the issues in complex fraud trials. It is simply patronising to suggest they don't. In reality, the most complicated fraud trials turn on the same kind of matters as every criminal trial, such as honesty, and intentional participation.
‘The problem with long trials is not juries, but their management by professionals in the prosecution, defence and court service. What’s more, removing juries might lead to the introduction of even more complex evidence, which could make trials longer and more expensive.
‘The separation between judge and jury underpins all criminal trials. By making judges the arbiters of fact and law, they will be in possession of knowledge and information that would not be before a jury. What confidence would a defendant have that a judge could genuinely disregard such material?’
