OT Jury service. At 75? Are they serious? Again.

[Another Dave]

Some of you may remember that last September, at the age of 75, I was summoned for jury service for the first time in my life. Since I can't stay awake after 1:00 without having a sleep. I wrote to them, with supporting evidence, that I was 75 and diabetic. I got off.

Now I have been "randomly selected" again for jury service. I'm aware the random numbers can, in the short term, exhibit peculiar effects but I'm still cynical.

I'll just repeat the process that worked last time. Roll on 76.

Another Dave

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I had much the same - but had already done 3 jury stints over the years.

I'd probably have done it again, but on this last occasion it was to a central London court which would have meant the tube in the rush hour, and I have sciatica which makes standing for long periods very uncomfortable. Had it been an outer London court, so more likely to get a seat on PT, I'd have done it.

After explaining this got a letter back saying I was exempt for life. ;-)

[Bob Minchin]

AIUI, once you have been chosen and excused prior to the event for some reason, you are put back in near the top of the pile and so likely to get chosen again soon. If however you turn up and are then not called, excused or whatever you seem to be regarded as having willingly done your civic duty and back in the pile for random selection. If then you are chosen within the next 2 years, I think that you can refuse. I got called for the first time at age 64, attended, wasted time in the jury room but was never selected and has sent home after about 3 days in

5 attendance. Made it impossible to commit to any other engagements as I was having to phone in each afternoon to see if I had to go in the next day.

[Robin]

Not in my experience of being called and excused for reasons of work in

1979, 1988 and 2001.

Since I retired I have naturally gone 13 years without being called ;)

[Pinnerite]

When I was about 36 I served on a murder case at the Old Bailey. After the verdict, the judge decreed that this had been a horrible cvase and a nasty experience for the jury and that all should be excused further service for life.

About 10 years later I was called to St Albans Crown Court. I wrote to the jury office asking if it was normal practise for the system to ignore the recommendation of a senior judge.

I was excused and haven't heatrd a word since. I'm 79. Do you think I'm off the hook? Alan

[ARW]

Did you find it a nasty experience?

[Another Dave]

You are exempt from the date of your 76th birthday.

Another Dave

[Mr Pounder Esquire]

I did read somewhere that if you just ignore the letter they will find somebody else. Is this true?

[Brian Gaff]

It just shows how much they actually check. Looking at previous selections and the outcomes would have saved all involved a lot of work. I bet if I'm invited again I'll have to go through the blind thing, which means i can be exempted unless I'm feeling particularly cranky, in which case I want it all in an accessible format, ie described for me and read to me if written stuff is involved. that should mean they will be busy for months. grin.

Brian

[Tim Watts]

I've not done a single one. I got called to the Old Bailey once, but they cancelled at the last minute, just after I'd done all the employer paperwork. I have my suspicions about that one...

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Assuming it's not going to cost you lost income, and in my case it didn't, I quite enjoyed the experience. But wasn't on any 'nasty' cases. And as regards being sent home after not being needed that day, just did a bit of sightseeing. Since they were all some way from home.

The first case I was on was two young lads accused of nicking old UK motorbikes and stripping them for spares to sell on. I asked quite a few questions. ;-) After being found guilty, one did a runner from the court.

[Andrew Gabriel]

A friend got pulled on to a drugs trial about 20 years ago that was expected to take a while and he wasn't best pleased. In the event, it was over in an hour, because the "evidence" had vanished.

Another friend was called for jury service and couldn't go to a job interview. They said they'd interview him after the case, but they'd already offered the job to someone else by then. They went bust a year later, so in retrospect, he was probably lucky.

[Nick Odell]

And since one of the reasons for the trial to (usually) take place and with the defendant and the witnesses all on public view is that the subtle nuances and expressions on faces form part of the experience, will you ask for the courtroom scene to be audio-described?

Nick

[Bob Minchin]

The letter are not sent via tracked mail so you can always claim it was never delivered but be aware that more and more post is being tracked to your door by GPS equipped posties and barcodes on the item. Just because you did not have to sign for it does not mean it was not a tracked delivery.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

The drug trial I was on was quite amazing. The defence consisted mainly of 'what ifs'. Which the prosecution very rarely challenged. I know it's the prosecution's job to prove things, but if a defence is based on a 'fact' surely it should be verifiable?

In some ways, using retired jurors makes sense. Not having to worry about work and so on. I was lucky enough to work for a large company who saw it as a civic duty. Could be very difficult for a smaller one.

[Mr Pounder Esquire]

Okay and thanks. If I do get the letter and reply saying that I take a dim view of certain religions and possibly immigrants and would not be impartial would I be excused? Not that I do of course ....

As for the postie. A lady postie hammered on my front door a week or so ago with a small parcel which was not for me. My address, wrong person. I told her this and she went away. 30 mins later she sneaked back and rammed the parcel through my letter box. So much for tracking. As it happens the phone number of the correct address was on the label of the parcel. I rang her and took it round.

[Tim Watts]

working in HE, it wouldn't cost me a bean either - my (then) employer would make up the difference after expenses (that's what the forms were for).

I suspect my current (also HE) employer could make a case to get me off as I am 1 of 1.2 people with my knowledge and responsibilities (the other chap can cover for short periods, but he has many many things on his plate hence the 0.2). I can go away for 2 weeks without much going wrong, but 2 months, if it was a long case, could be dicey.

Last time around I was part of a 12 strong team and could easily be covered, even in my specialisms, which themselves were shared by 3 or so others.

I presume they nabbed him quick sharp?

[Marland]

I suppose they would have to get somebody else if a cranky Judge jailed you for contempt of court. Probably unlikely , £1000 pound fine is what you risk.

GH

[Mr Pounder Esquire]

Just how can ignoring a letter /not replying be viewed as contempt of court? I often get letters delivered to me which are not for me. I shove them back into the post box with "Not known at this address" written on the envelope.

[Jethro_uk]

Certainly a few years ago turning up in a wheelchair usually meant dismissal, as most courts where not accessible for a juror (but had to be for defendants).

Never quite found out if that also meant less able legal professionals were affected ...