Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-kwt9d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T07:22:17.458Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Some thoughts on jury secrecy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Joseph Jaconelli*
Affiliation:
University of Manchester

Extract

Should those who have served as members of the jury in a newsworthy trial be restrained by the criminal law from recounting what transpired in the jury room?

The issues surrounding the legitimacy or otherwise of jury room disclosures pose peculiar problems in the administration of justice. They doso because such disclosures are made, not by journalists assigned to cover the trial (as at present), nor via the medium of televising the event (as may shortly be the case), nor simply by those most intimately involved in the conduct and outcome ofthe trial (such as the accused or counsel). The special feature which sets jury room disclosures apart is the fact that they emanate from those who are directly responsible for the verdict in the case. Viewed in this way, the accounts given by ex-jurors should perhaps be considered in broadly the same light as the recollections of the person less directly responsible for the outcome, namely the trial judge. And, indeed, we do have a wellknown instance of the latter type of account in Lord Devlin's Easing the Passing , the story of the trial for murder in 1957 of Dr John Bodkin Adams.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Society of Legal Scholars 1990

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable