Law Weblog

Guidance to jurors who are journalists

Saturday 28 November 2009 at 3:26 pm | In News | Post Comment

*R v Cornwall [2009] CA
[Jury – guidance when journalist should declare conflict of interest]

D was convicted of a knife murder. He appealed on the grounds that on the jury during his trial was a journalist from “The Sun” who was outspoken and who held strong and well publicised views on issues such as law and order, and who had written about the defendant’s case after his conviction.

Held: It was inevitable that on juries there would be people with considerable background knowledge of the way in which the criminal justice system operated and doubtless with informed views, perhaps strong views, about such issues.  However, the Court did make a suggestion as to good practice to be adopted by journalists or other writers if called upon to serve on a jury.
The right of peremptory challenge had long since been lost.
The practice of permitting a voir dire of all potential jurors in order to determine their views prior to selection for jury service does not exist.
In specific cases, judges might direct specific questions to potential jurors to avoid particular potential problems, but such a course was exceptional and case specific rather than general and unfocussed.
The appeal would be dismissed.
Per curiam: A journalist or other writer, if called to serve on a jury which will have to examine issues upon which he or she has expressed strong opinions about the state of the law (rather than detection, sentence or the system generally) will be well advised to alert the judge of that fact so that an informed decision can be taken about the juror’s ability faithfully to apply the judge’s directions as to the approach to be adopted to the case being tried. It is simply a question of pragmatic good sense and permits a sensible analysis at the earliest opportunity.