JURY SQUARING

Hokitika Guardian, 29 June 1929, Page 2

JURY SQUARING

PLAN TO MEET IT. SYDNEY, June 30. Of the amendments of the Victorian criminal code, foreshadowed in the recent policy speech of the Premier of that State, and now being prepared for 'Parliamentary sanction, the one dealing with majority verdicts in all but capital cases as a law (tie form which is regarded as long overdue there. The old jury system involving a unanimous verdict has long been jealously guarded and idealised, but the mentally alert evil-doer seems to have given rise to a new problem, and a new set of circumstances calling for attention.

Commenting on the decision, the Melbourne “Herald” said that jury squaring and intimidation were not unknown in Melbourne, and when it is possible by bribes and threats to corrupt only one juryman in twelve in order to secure a re-trial, and perhaps, eventual acquittal, the path of the jury squarer and the intimidator is madeoasy. That the Crown law authorities have recognised this is evident in the fact that they have abandoned the publication of the occupations and addresses of the jury panels before the trial. But the latter precaution is not always eflocTTvo, for there still exists ways by which prisoners and their associates may secure knowledge of the personnel of the juries. It is evident that the Government, in bringing forward the proposal for majority verdicts, is quite aware of the modern dangers attending the system of trial by jury with unanimous verdicts. Modern and instutc lorn luminals must be met and fought by the law with equally modern and astute measures for the suppression of crime. The pnotectioln of society denuynds nothing less. It is pointed out that other parts of the Empire have already recognised the necessity In Natal, it is said, a system of majority verdicts has been found satisfactory, and nearer home South Australia has adopted a somewhat similar system. The South Australian Act of 1D27 provides that in all but capital cases, if twelves jurymen cannot agree after four hours’ deliberation, the verdict of ten will bo accepted. Tn capital eases, should disagreement continue after four hours’ deliberation,, tire verdict of ten jurymen returning a verdict of manslaughter will be accepted.