Untitled

Hokitika Guardian, 24 April 1933, Page 4

Tii r ji’r,- oyster:' in England formed the subject of much comment in an English paper recently. The writer went r A to state —“(1 ) The average man (or woman) is totally unable to retain the arguments or the evidence in his head; and equally unable to select what is important' from the mass of conflicting material suddenly thro”"’ l at him. The natural capacity to do so is extremely rare; and the jurvman has no training whatever to equip him for so difficult a task. • Nor is he assisted (so far as my experience goes)

with ally documents, j sat, on the jury in a eaiuplk-atej and prolonged action a few years ago. We had nothing to help us—not even a copy of the pleadings. 1 way told subsequently that it was mod undesirable for juries to have copies of tiie pleadings. Why? Because they might get oven worse tied up with the pleading than without them! As the case dragged on the Judge and the counsel v. ere supplied with verbatim reports of the evi-ence given on the preceding day.-:. Not the ■ jury. Again, why not? Not, 1 was told, because of the expense, but because we should be even more muddled if we had the evidence to refer to than we were already. 1 have no doubt that this wsg quite true. But it is surely a. ryducio ad absurdum cf the whole system. (2; The formation of opinion by a jury, as e..p. eased in its verdict, is the result of .sentiment r;ither than of reason. Discussion in the iurv-room can take the most farcical turn. There is always the amateur lawyer, concerned to confuse the issue of fact; the bored juryman ; the inconceivably stupid juryman. Th? issue may easily turn on the presence of one man with a stonger personality than the rest. (3) These weaknesses of the jurv have a most debasing effect upon the conduct of a case. Instead of presenting a rational 'argument for dispassionate consideration, counsel are tempted to employ every tawdry device of rhetoric and theatricalism to impress the jury. These devices often defeat themselves by their own crudity. But they are responsible for much popular mistrust of the courts. Skilfully used by a clever advocate they may pervert the course of justice.”