Jury vs. Lay Magistrates

Attribute	Jury	Lay Magistrates
Selection process	Random selection from electoral register	Appointed by Lord Chancellor
Qualifications	No formal qualifications required	No formal legal qualifications required
Number of members	12 members	3 members
Decision-making	Unanimous decision required	Majority decision required
Training	Minimal training provided	Comprehensive training provided

Selection Process

Juries are selected at random from the electoral register, with individuals being summoned to serve on a jury for a specific trial. This random selection process ensures a diverse range of individuals from different backgrounds and experiences. Lay magistrates, on the other hand, are recruited by the local advisory committee and undergo a rigorous selection process, including interviews and assessments. This process aims to select individuals who are suitable for the role and have the necessary skills and qualities to serve as magistrates.

Training and Qualifications

Jurors do not receive any formal training before serving on a jury. They are given instructions by the judge at the beginning of the trial and are expected to make decisions based on the evidence presented in court. Lay magistrates, on the other hand, undergo comprehensive training before they can start hearing cases. This training covers various aspects of the law, court procedures, and decision-making skills. Lay magistrates are also required to pass a qualification exam before they can sit on the bench.

Decision-Making Process

Juries make decisions based on the evidence presented in court and the directions given by the judge. They must reach a unanimous verdict in criminal cases and a majority decision in civil cases. Lay magistrates, on the other hand, make decisions independently and do not have to reach a unanimous verdict. They must consider the evidence presented in court, apply the relevant law, and come to a decision based on their own judgment.

Role in the Legal System

Juries play a crucial role in the legal system by ensuring that individuals accused of crimes receive a fair trial by their peers. They act as a safeguard against potential bias or unfairness in the criminal justice system. Lay magistrates, on the other hand, play a more active role in the legal system by hearing a wide range of cases, including criminal, family, and civil matters. They help to alleviate the workload of the courts and provide a local perspective on legal issues.

Impartiality and Independence

Jurors are expected to be impartial and unbiased when serving on a jury. They must base their decisions solely on the evidence presented in court and not be influenced by outside factors. Lay magistrates, on the other hand, are required to declare any conflicts of interest and recuse themselves from cases where they may be biased. They are also expected to act independently and make decisions based on the law and evidence, without any external influence.

Public Perception

Juries are often seen as a fundamental part of the justice system, representing the voice of the community in legal proceedings. They are viewed as a symbol of democracy and fairness in the legal system. Lay magistrates, on the other hand, are sometimes criticized for lacking legal expertise and being too lenient or harsh in their sentencing decisions. However, they are also praised for their dedication to serving the community and their commitment to upholding the law.