Done it 3 times now, the first when Soho was soho of old. A tourist new to England was quoted £500 for a BJ opening his wallet she explained he didn't have enough cash but was prepared to escort him to the cashpoint. Using a card he drew out the cash, with that she gave him directions to a nearby hotel saying she would be there in 20 minutes. You can guess the rest. On retiring we were told to elect a foreman and as we all sat down a well spoken private school headmistress stood and said she was used to public speaking and would like be the foreman on the understanding someone explained what a 'BlowJob" was!
£500?!
She must have been stunning.
Not really, the tourist was gullible. We said she should be found NG because if he fell the "I'll meet you in 20 minutes" line he deserved all he got. Incidentally the Black Taxi driver I got matey with said after another lady juror said that appeared to be a lot of money. "Your kidding my dear, Ive a 200k mortgage and I can't get one at home"
Got called twice, both times at The Old Bailey. First time on first day sent home and told to come back next day. Next day returned case explained to all, then Jury selected, but I wasn't chosen so told to go home. Was a complex case concerning the collapsed passenger gangway at a fiery port where people were killed and who's fault it actually was. Was informed that it was probably going to last 3 months , so was relieved when not selected for that one. 2nd time tuned up at The Bailey and got told to report to Croydon court the next day. Went to Croydon and sat on 1 case ( in 2 weeks ) which was a dispute between 2 down & outs who lived in sheltered housing over who had stolen a knife of one of the other and should never of come to court in the 1st place , took less than 1/2 hour to reach a verdict. So I've never had an interesting case, but found the initial over view and experience useful.
I done it 4 times 2 at the Old Bailey 1 at Southwark and 1 at Belmarsh just after it opened, the one at Belmarsh we listened to the case for 4 days we were going to be sent out to reach a verdict on the fifth day and over night the accused who was on bail done a runner
Done it 3 times now, the first when Soho was soho of old. A tourist new to England was quoted £500 for a BJ opening his wallet she explained he didn't have enough cash but was prepared to escort him to the cashpoint. Using a card he drew out the cash, with that she gave him directions to a nearby hotel saying she would be there in 20 minutes. You can guess the rest. On retiring we were told to elect a foreman and as we all sat down a well spoken private school headmistress stood and said she was used to public speaking and would like be the foreman on the understanding someone explained what a 'BlowJob" was!
£500?!
She must have been stunning.
She charged £1 for everytime she said "are you nearly done yet?"
I did jury service many years ago in a fraud trial that lasted about 6 weeks. Some people on the jury had decided the defendants were guilty on the first morning, based largely, it seemed, on their ethnicity. It was a complicated rather sad case, and on balance, I think we got the verdict right. But it was not as clear cut as I had expected a decision to be. The defendants basically ruined their lives through their actions, and it was hard to tell if one was trying to protect the other ( it was father and son) It was an experience, and it was interesting, but at the time it weighed rather heavily on me, the son involved was about my age and he had made a bad decision, that he then had to compound to hide the original crime. I felt no pleasure at all at the verdict, but I can imagine other types of cases might prompt a different feeling. I am not sure if I would really want to do it again tbh.
The case I had was pretty uninspiring, both as it wasn't very interesting, but also because everyone involved was going through the motions. The defendant's probation officer was waiting for us to pass the guilty verdict, which took a lot longer than it could have as one young juror found the responsibility of "condemning somebody" quite daunting
Done it twice. Firstly when i was 18 at Southwark but after 3 days got moved to Old Bailey. Bit of an eye opener. The usher took us on a tour of the building. Fascinating building and built in such a way that the accused and the jury stand together outside
Second time did it at Inner London Crown court a few years ago when I wasn't working and was between jobs. filled in all my timesheets and travel expenses forms and got paid about £750. not sure if that was the job seekers allowance equivalent, but it was great considering I was being paid my notice.
loved it and got a few cases, and learnt a lot about society.
I’ve been called three times, once to the Old Bailey and twice to Southwark Crown Court.
My first and most interesting case was at the Old Bailey. it was a most bizarre trial that ran for three weeks. I remember at the time feeling some relief that it wasn’t to be the big IRA case which was due up. They had a bit of a history in jury nobbling and this could be somewhat worse than standing in the away end at the old Den (I’m told)..
Anyway this guy in his fifties was about to be sentenced for a previous crime. To delay sentencing and maybe court some sympathy with the judge he arranged to have himself shot in the leg (the criminal mind?). The thing that was quite amusing was that one of the cartridges in the double barrelled shotgun was doctored in a way to give him the most minor injury possible. Unfortunately for the accused, that particular cartridge didn’t work at the time and his ‘accomplice’ let him have the second barrel - which wasn’t doctored. He consequently sustained a major injury.
During the case we learnt that this older chap (of four) was a bit of a card and would often compare, tell a few jokes and sing a few songs in the pubs along the OKR. We were to witness this man’s dramatic skills whenever he took the stand. On one occasion he made the most emotional of confessions that rung every inch of sentiment from the court. He told us that he had been a lifetime crook, had done some terrible things and was guilty as charged. He even directed us to give him the guilty charge, but we must have mercy on the three young accomplices as they were absolutely innocent of wrongdoing and although associates of his, they had no knowledge of his criminal business activities. There were even a few tears as he left the stand.
It was only after the judge’s summing up and he’d began to give us jury members some direction that it became obvious what the old rogue was up to. The charge was one of conspiracy. The judge explained that you cannot have a conspiracy of one. If we were to make the three younger defendants innocent then we must by implication make the old rogue (not the judge’s words) innocent. He would only accept a conspiracy of two or more.
Long story short they were all made guilty by majority decision. The older guy was still to be sentenced for his original crime along with this one. A younger male was implicated as the marksman and the two young ladies were guilty of deception only.
I was most impressed by the the Judge who dealt out appropriate sentences to the men, but showed great compassion to the girls who were swept along in the case. I well remember the judge’s name as it was Judge. Judge Judge went on to become the Lord Chief justice of England and Wales.
Never been called up though I would be very prepared to serve on a Jury. Mrs Plum due to do it next month after an initial wriggle out on language basis a couple of years ago. Didn't work this time. She intends to take her English-Chinese dictionary with her and to stop proceedings whenever a tricky or leagalese or unusual word is spoken in order to try to understand it. I fear Mrs Plum is of the 'they must be guilty if they're on trial' type.
Done it last September. I stuck my hand up to be Foreman to tick a box and then when the judge asked me a yes or no question I got it wrong. The whole court laughed. Never again.
Did it just before Christmas for the first time. Was Foreman in a case which was fascinating but unsaisfactory in that accused was of impeccable character and a thoroughly decent person who had just made one fatal misjudgement. No pleasure whatsoever in finding them guilty. Had never been called, nor had my wife then we both got called within a year of each other.
Done it last September. I stuck my hand up to be Foreman to tick a box and then when the judge asked me a yes or no question I got it wrong. The whole court laughed. Never again.
That's brilliant, I thought that sort of stuff only ever happened to me!
Comments
2nd time tuned up at The Bailey and got told to report to Croydon court the next day. Went to Croydon and sat on 1 case ( in 2 weeks ) which was a dispute between 2 down & outs who lived in sheltered housing over who had stolen a knife of one of the other and should never of come to court in the 1st place , took less than 1/2 hour to reach a verdict.
So I've never had an interesting case, but found the initial over view and experience useful.
http://telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/11021249/Magistrate-breaks-into-song-in-courtoom.html
; - )
It was a complicated rather sad case, and on balance, I think we got the verdict right. But it was not as clear cut as I had expected a decision to be. The defendants basically ruined their lives through their actions, and it was hard to tell if one was trying to protect the other ( it was father and son)
It was an experience, and it was interesting, but at the time it weighed rather heavily on me, the son involved was about my age and he had made a bad decision, that he then had to compound to hide the original crime. I felt no pleasure at all at the verdict, but I can imagine other types of cases might prompt a different feeling.
I am not sure if I would really want to do it again tbh.
Second time did it at Inner London Crown court a few years ago when I wasn't working and was between jobs. filled in all my timesheets and travel expenses forms and got paid about £750. not sure if that was the job seekers allowance equivalent, but it was great considering I was being paid my notice.
loved it and got a few cases, and learnt a lot about society.
My first and most interesting case was at the Old Bailey. it was a most bizarre trial that ran for three weeks. I remember at the time feeling some relief that it wasn’t to be the big IRA case which was due up. They had a bit of a history in jury nobbling and this could be somewhat worse than standing in the away end at the old Den (I’m told)..
Anyway this guy in his fifties was about to be sentenced for a previous crime. To delay sentencing and maybe court some sympathy with the judge he arranged to have himself shot in the leg (the criminal mind?). The thing that was quite amusing was that one of the cartridges in the double barrelled shotgun was doctored in a way to give him the most minor injury possible. Unfortunately for the accused, that particular cartridge didn’t work at the time and his ‘accomplice’ let him have the second barrel - which wasn’t doctored. He consequently sustained a major injury.
During the case we learnt that this older chap (of four) was a bit of a card and would often compare, tell a few jokes and sing a few songs in the pubs along the OKR. We were to witness this man’s dramatic skills whenever he took the stand. On one occasion he made the most emotional of confessions that rung every inch of sentiment from the court. He told us that he had been a lifetime crook, had done some terrible things and was guilty as charged. He even directed us to give him the guilty charge, but we must have mercy on the three young accomplices as they were absolutely innocent of wrongdoing and although associates of his, they had no knowledge of his criminal business activities. There were even a few tears as he left the stand.
It was only after the judge’s summing up and he’d began to give us jury members some direction that it became obvious what the old rogue was up to. The charge was one of conspiracy. The judge explained that you cannot have a conspiracy of one. If we were to make the three younger defendants innocent then we must by implication make the old rogue (not the judge’s words) innocent. He would only accept a conspiracy of two or more.
Long story short they were all made guilty by majority decision. The older guy was still to be sentenced for his original crime along with this one. A younger male was implicated as the marksman and the two young ladies were guilty of deception only.
I was most impressed by the the Judge who dealt out appropriate sentences to the men, but showed great compassion to the girls who were swept along in the case. I well remember the judge’s name as it was Judge. Judge Judge went on to become the Lord Chief justice of England and Wales.
Mrs Plum due to do it next month after an initial wriggle out on language basis a couple of years ago. Didn't work this time. She intends to take her English-Chinese dictionary with her and to stop proceedings whenever a tricky or leagalese or unusual word is spoken in order to try to understand it.
I fear Mrs Plum is of the 'they must be guilty if they're on trial' type.
Got Charlton to thank for that: )