My court case started Friday

Hah - that got you clicking the link.

OK, OK, it's not what you think. I'm not up for beating close friends to death (although with one friend the thought occasionally crosses my mind, usually at the point he says he hasn't got anything to wear).

I'm on Jury service.

This is an interesting job where they pay you 50 pounds a day to come in and read a book. The procedure goes like this

Your name is selected off the electoral roll as being suitable for Jury service; the service is to last 2 weeks but could be longer if there is a difficult court case.

My name was selected, I started last Monday at the Birmingham Crown court. 85 of us turned up; we were given a short introduction to the system, then went to the Jury waiting room to wait

and wait

and wait

The system is that between 15 - 30 Jurors are selected at random for each court case. They are termed the jury panel. Once selected the jury panel is then taken to the court and the clerk of the court then picks 12 people at random from a box. The remainder go back into the jury pool.

So it's a lottery

I didn't get selected on Monday so was sent home Monday afternoon and was told to come back on Wednesday since I had been put into the jury panel for a case on Wednesday. Now before you start writing to your MP about the waste of public funds, I had said that I could return to work if I wasn't needed, so Monday afternoon and Tuesday I worked.

Wednesday I turned up at 10:15. The court doesn't start until 10:30, so that's when we get to work (Charitably, I assume that the lawyers, barristers etc have all been hard at work from 9:00 am like all normal people).

I go up to court at 11:00, the names get called out, I'm not on the jury.

I never was any good at the lottery.

Now, at this point we start talking about finances. The case I wasn't on was two kids who had been accused of stealing a chain worth 45 pounds. That's it. No charge of violence, just that of theft. So in financial terms we're talking 45 pounds. A jury costs 50 pounds per person per day. Judges, lawyers (the kids would not have been able to pay for their own defense) and court cost what?

Ok, so a jury is a good method of ensuring a consensual view, but 12 people? Hmm.

I was then sent home with a warning that I was on the jury panel for a trial starting Friday that would last not 2 weeks but two months. My boss wasn't happy, but there's no way round it. Courts specifically don't include the excuse 'My boss isn't happy' as a valid excuse for not doing jury service (the judge told us that on Friday - his statement was 'if your absence would bring severe financial hardship to your company you could be excused' which doesn't really apply in my case).

So on Friday I turn up. We go to court. There are 30 of us in the panel. 12 get selected. Now the reason for the panel is that the defendants can object to a juror being selected, so one of the remainder would take place of the rejected juror. In addition (as in this case) a juror could be excused if they know about the case - for example, if they know the defendant or any of the witnesses. The case we were on was a drugs case and there were a lot of witnesses, which explains why the jury panel was so large, since there was some scope for swapping people around.

In the event there were no problems and I (yippee) didn't get selected.

I go back to the waiting room and get told I'm on another panel. So I wait and read a book.
It's a good thick book. I'm now half way through. (The Neutronium Alchemist by Peter Hamilton if you must know).

At 11:30 I get called up for another jury panel; 15 of us.

THIS time I get picked. This is a bit of a relief since there was another long trial coming up on Monday.

So, I can't discuss the case. But I'll say this:

I've already formed my opinion about the prosecutor. I hate her.

My first impression of her was that she was a poser. She wore her gown half way down her back. It was either an affectation or she couldn't be bothered to pull it up.

The judge hated her as well.

To be charitable, it became apparent that she (I hope) was new to the job. She was so bad that one of the jurors thought that she was defending the client!

We started at 12:15. We stopped at 12:45 for lunch

I could get to like this job

We then went through an afternoon listening to the first witness. I will tell you all about this later in general terms - I don't think I can talk about the case even after the trial. I had a brief chat with one of my relatives who is a lawyer earlier today when he said he was interested on how jurors reach verdicts. I can't say yet, but my initial feeling is that we're amateurs to law, we're confused and the prosecutor (who should have had all the running so far) hasn't asked the questions I would like answers to. Hopefully she'll eventually answer them. I hope. But I find the way we're drip fed evidence infuriating. Just tell me the pros and cons, then start arguing the case and start cross examining the witnesses.

We restart on Monday. Looks like it may take longer than I thought.