gotta do jury service…

[another_dave_b]

One of the benefits of my job is that I am exempt from jury duty.

Criminal mastermind?

 

[bonj2]

just vote guilty whatever.

for further advice see: http://comedy.videosift.com/video/Peep-Show-Jez-Does-Jury-Service-Mark-Goes-Clubbing

 

[alecstilleyedye]

just vote guilty whatever.

for further advice see: http://comedy.videosift.com/video/Peep-Show-Jez-Does-Jury-Service-Mark-Goes-Clubbing

as it's an inquest, i think the juiciest verdict we can go for is 'unlawful killing' or some such.

 

[bonj2]

as it's an inquest, i think the juiciest verdict we can go for is 'unlawful killing' or some such.

remember also that (iirc) your employer isn't obliged to pay you your normal full salary while you're on jury service, only a statutory minimum (which, again iirc, they can reclaim from the courts service/cps or whatever).
So, if they are only going to pay you this minimum, just go along with whatever anybody else thinks, however if they are being kind and paying you your full whack, then you might aswell stick a spanner in the works and live off hotel food for a bit longer.

 

[swee'pea99]

I found it really interesting.

 

[ChrisKH]

I have never been called once in 45 years.

So, I suspect that's like saying the 'you know what' fairy hasn't visited recently. A delivery from HM Courts Service will be in the post no doubt.

 

[Aperitif]

"Oi! Chris..."

 

[alecstilleyedye]

remember also that (iirc) your employer isn't obliged to pay you your normal full salary while you're on jury service, only a statutory minimum (which, again iirc, they can reclaim from the courts service/cps or whatever).
So, if they are only going to pay you this minimum, just go along with whatever anybody else thinks, however if they are being kind and paying you your full whack, then you might aswell stick a spanner in the works and live off hotel food for a bit longer.

apparently (just checked) i will be on full pay minus anything paid by the courts.

 

[Hover Fly]

I have never been called once in 45 years.

So, I suspect that's like saying the 'you know what' fairy hasn't visited recently. A delivery from HM Courts Service will be in the post no doubt.

A quick "poll" among my friends shows that none of those in the small town where I was brought up have been on juries, while in the large town 8 miles away, but a different district council and hence electoral roll, most have been.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

What if you get a bung from the defendant?

unlikely, unless the deceased has remarkable foresight…

it has got me wondering, what if the inquest is for an rta where a motorist has killed a cyclist? do i declare an affinity (as a cyclist), even though i wear both hats, so to speak?

 

[Arch]

unlikely, unless the deceased has remarkable foresight…

it has got me wondering, what if the inquest is for an rta where a motorist has killed a cyclist? do i declare an affinity (as a cyclist), even though i wear both hats, so to speak?

Would that be a issue for a jury inquest? If the police (or CPS) decide the motorist is at fault enough to stand trial, would the coroner just find appropriately? I don't know, I've only been involved with one inquest and that was non jury, and basically a formality...

If it is relevant, I guess you declare anything you think might affect your POV, and the coroner decides if it's likely to be a problem.

 

[alecstilleyedye]

Would that be a issue for a jury inquest? If the police (or CPS) decide the motorist is at fault enough to stand trial, would the coroner just find appropriately? I don't know, I've only been involved with one inquest and that was non jury, and basically a formality...

If it is relevant, I guess you declare anything you think might affect your POV, and the coroner decides if it's likely to be a problem.

it's an interesting one. one might argue that as a keen cyclist (in the local club) who has also passed the iam advanced drivers' exam that i would be well placed to make an informed decision. i certainly wouldn't side with the cyclist if they were clearly in the wrong, tragic as the end result may have been.

 

[col]

unlikely, unless the deceased has remarkable foresight…

it has got me wondering, what if the inquest is for an rta where a motorist has killed a cyclist? do i declare an affinity (as a cyclist), even though i wear both hats, so to speak?

Why the need,dont you think you would give an honest hearing?I wouldnt feel the need to proclaim im a pedestrian too if a pedestrian was killed by a car?