Unit 5.

Ex. 54. Look through the text.

Jury

In most criminal justice systems and some civil cases which require a jury, panels are initially selected at random from the adult population of the district. A person who is serving on (is a member of) a jury is known as a juror.

The number of jurors must be a specified size (usually twelve, though smaller cases may require only six), and since there is always the possibility of jurors not completing the trial for health or other reasons, often some alternate jurors are nominated, who will also follow the trial (but do not take part in deciding the verdict), as a precaution in case a new juror is needed part way through the trial (most often used when the trial will be lengthy).

Serving on a jury is normally compulsory if a citizen is chosen. Since a jury is intended to be an impartial panel capable of reaching a verdict, there are often procedures and requirements, for instance, fluent understanding of the language, or the ability to test jurors or otherwise exclude jurors who might be perceived as less than neutral or more partial to hear one side or the other.

The jurors hear the cases presented by both the defence and prosecution, and in some jurisdictions a summing-up from the judge. They then retire as a group to consider a verdict.

Juries are traditionally expected to reach a unanimous verdict through their deliberations. If this is not possible after an extended period of deliberations, jurisdictions vary as to whether they will accept a majority verdict or declare a mistrial (generally, a criminal trial will require a unanimous verdict, while a civil trial may allow for less than a unanimous verdict).

Ex. 55. Translate the words and expressions.

- justice system

- panel

- at random

- to be nominated

- follow the trial

- precaution

- compulsory

- impartial

- perceive

- defence and prosecution

- to consider a verdict

- unanimous verdict

- deliberation

- mistrial

Ex. 56. Fill in the proper words.

alternate, cases, defence, deliberations, impartial panel, jurors, prosecution, selected, serving on, trial, unanimous, verdict

Jurors are initially …………… from the adult population of the district.

The number of …………… is usually twelve, though smaller …………… may require only six. As jurors may refuse to take part in the trial for health or other reasons, often some …………… jurors are nominated. They will also follow the …………… but do not take part in deciding the verdict.

…………… a jury is normally compulsory if a citizen is chosen. Since a jury is intended to be an …………… …………… capable of reaching a verdict, there are often procedures and requirements.

The jurors hear the cases presented by both the …………… and……………, and in some jurisdictions a summing-up from the judge. They then retire as a group to consider a…………….

Juries are traditionally expected to reach a …………… verdict through their deliberations. If this is not possible after an extended period of ……………, jury can accept a majority verdict or declare a mistrial.

Ex. 57. Link the definitions.

juror panel trial alternate juror precaution compulsory requirement defence jurisdiction unanimous mistrial

a group of specialists who give their opinion about something a juror who follow the trial instead of another a member of a jury a trial in which the jury cannot reach a decision an action done to avoid possible discomfort or mistake an examination of evidence in the court by judge and jury, to decide if somebody accused of a crime is guilty or not arguments said in the court to prove that a person did not commit a crime something that is needed or demanded as necessary supported or agreed by everyone the right to use the power of an official body, esp. to make decisions on questions of law which must be done by orders; obligatory

1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11

Ex. 58. Translate the sentences.

1. A common method for drafting jurors is to draw them at random from electoral rolls. 2. The most common exclusions are for people who themselves work in the criminal justice system, are caring for young children, have an interest in the case, are under the age of 18 years, or who have health problems or serious criminal records. 3. In the United States, potential jurors form the jury in waiting or venire*. 4. Selected jurors are generally subjected to a system of examination whereby both the prosecution (or plaintiff**, in a civil case) and defence can object to a juror. 5. If juries can’t reach an unanimous verdict after an extended period of deliberations, a judge will usually instruct a jury to contemplate*** a majority verdict. 6. For juries to fulfill their role to analyze the facts of the case, there are strict rules about their use of information during the trial. 7. Jurors are generally required to keep their deliberations in strict confidence. 8. In most continental European jurisdictions, the judges have more power in a trial and the role and powers of a jury are often restricted.

venire* - судебный приказ о сформировании состава присяжных

plaintiff** - истец

contemplate*** - рассматривать

Ex. 59. Use the proper prepositions.

In most criminal justice systems and some civil cases which require a jury, panels are initially selected ……… random ……… the adult population ……… the district.

The number ……… jurors must be a specified size, and since there is always the possibility of jurors not completing the trial ……… health or other reasons, often some alternate jurors are nominated.

Serving ……… a jury is normally compulsory if a citizen is chosen. Since a jury is intended to be an impartial panel capable ……… reaching a verdict, there are often procedures and requirements.

The jurors hear the cases presented ……… both the defence and prosecution, and ……… some jurisdictions a summing-up ……… the judge.

Juries are traditionally expected to reach a unanimous verdict ……… their deliberations. If this is not possible ……… an extended period ……… deliberations, jurisdictions vary as to whether they will accept a majority verdict or declare a mistrial.

Ex. 60. Translate the sentences.

1. Суд присяжных – это суд, при котором решение выносят обычные граждане, выбранные по спискам избирателей случайным образом. 2. Присяжным по данному делу не может стать человек, работающий в правоохранительных органах или который является заинтересованным лицом. 3. В США присяжным не может стать и юрист, поскольку считается, что он может повлиять на решение присяжных. 4. И сторона защиты, и сторона обвинения может дать отвод (object) кому-либо из присяжных. 5. Не существует ограничений времени, которое требуется присяжным для вынесения приговора. 6. Чтобы присяжные могли вынести справедливое решение по делу, им запрещено получать какую-либо информацию, кроме предоставляемой в суде. 7. По английскому законодательству запрещено публиковать данные о совещании присяжных даже после судебного процесса.

Ex. 61. Fill in the E-crossword. All the words end with the letter E.

			E	question or problem that will be dealt with by a law court
				E	an official of a court who decides how criminals should be punished
					E	to say what should be done in a particular situation
						E	an act of wrongdoing, esp. of breaking the law; crime
							E	the answers given in a court of law
								E	a group of people chosen to do particular job
									E	syn. to Justice of the Peace
										E	try to find out the truth about a crime
									E	to consider carefully, in formal meetings with other people
								E	……… juror = a juror who follow the trial instead of another
							E	a punishment for a criminal declared in court; syn. to verdict
						E	arguments said in court to prove that a person did not commit a crime
					E	The jury ……… as a group to consider a verdict
				E	a dishonest, violent action that can be punished by law
			E	a collection of laws and rules

Ex. 62. Complete the sentences.

A jury trial is a trial of jurors, Jury must listen to all the evidence The judge, on the other hand, "decides the law" – Jury should not be influenced There is always the possibility of jurors not completing the trial The jurors hear the cases presented Juries are traditionally expected

by both the defence and prosecution. by sympathy or prejudice. for health or other reasons. made up of citizens selected from among a pool that has been randomly selected and are generally not legal professionals. presented at trial and to "decide the facts" - that is, to decide what really happened. that is, makes decisions on legal issues that come up during the trial. to reach a unanimous verdict through their deliberations.

1	2	3	4	5	6	7

Ex. 63. Read.

Law and justice are not always the same. When they aren't, destroying the law may be the first step toward changing it.

Just for fun!

☺

Gloria Steinem

Ex. 64. Translate the sentences.

А. 1. In common law countries such as England and the United States, the role of the jury is the "finder of fact", while the Judge has the sole responsibility of interpreting the appropriate law and instructing the jury accordingly. 2. In other words, a panel of citizens collectively decide what facts occurred relating to a lawsuit. 3. Juries are most commonly associated with common law jurisdictions. 4. A jury trial should not be confused with grand jury proceedings. 5. The jury used for a trial can be referred to as a "petit jury", to distinguish it from a grand jury, used for indictments. 6. There are no restrictions on how a jury may proceed to reach such a verdict, and no set time limit. Juries may deliberate for as many as several days. 7. Sometimes a jury will take a wider view than the judge's summing up, a jury may find the defendant "not guilty" even though he violated the law if the jury thinks that the law is invalid or unjust. 8. Verdicts which appear not to apply the law to the evidence are sometimes called "perverse"* verdicts. 9. In the event that this "perverse" verdict involves the conviction of a defendant who should not have been convicted on the basis of the evidence presented, English law has no means of correcting this error. 10. Appeals can be based ONLY upon new evidence or errors by the judge or prosecution, (but not the defence), or because of jury irregularities.

perverse* - ошибочный

В. Что касается суда присяжных в Англии, нужно сказать, что по английскому законодательству вердикт присяжных становится основанием для постановления по нему приговора судьей только после того, как он принят судьей и занесен в протокол. Судья не обязан принимать всякий вердикт, который вынесен присяжными заседателями. Причем, судья может предложить присяжным заседателям пересмотреть свой вердикт, если они не приняли во внимание сделанные им указания. Присяжных могут вернуть в совещательную комнату и в том случае, если вердикт страдает каким-либо недостатком (внутренне противоречив, двусмыслен).

С. В Англии и США исторически жюри присяжных пользуется своим правом на вынесение оправдательного вердикта независимо от имеющихся доказательств в качестве политического противовеса слишком суровым наказаниям и слишком суровым законам. По-английски, вынесение присяжными заседателями такого оправдательного вердикта называется «jury nullification» или «nullification of law».

В Англии первый случай, когда присяжные заседатели нуллифицировали закон (nullify the law), произошел в 1670 г. Присяжные отказались выносить обвинительный вердикт в отношении Уильяма Пенна (William Penn) и Уильяма Мэда (William Mead), двух активистов секты Квакеров, обвиненных в незаконном собрании. Судья не принял оправдательный вердикт и предложил присяжным возобновить их обсуждение. Причем присяжные должны были совещаться без еды и питья до тех пор, пока не вынесут угодный председательствующему судье обвинительный вердикт. Однако коллегия присяжных все равно отказалась признать виновность подсудимых. В результате, присяжные были оштрафованы и заключены в тюрьму до уплаты ими штрафов. Однако Суд общих тяжб (Court of Common Pleas) принял решение об освобождении присяжных, установив, что они не могут быть наказаны за их вердикт.

Ex. 65. Translate the text.

Вся прелесть английского правосудия, заговорил сэр Магнус звонким мелодичным голосом, - заключается в том, что оно основано на двух абсолютно нелогичных принципах. Во-первых, все воображают, будто их судят присяжные, но это, разумеется, полнейший вздор. На самом деле все решает судья, инструктирующий присяжных. Возьмем теперь этих присяжных. Исходя из странного понятия, будто двенадцать человек лучше, чем два человека, или шесть, или четыре, никто не принимает в расчет, что двенадцать недоумков могут быть опаснее, чем два. Мой опыт показывает, что все судьи и все присяжные – недоумки. Вот почему у самого заурядного преступника нет никаких шансов и невинный человек также обречен еще до того, как сел на скамью подсудимых. <…>

- Постойте, ужаснулся Адриан, я полагал, что весь смысл суда присяжных в том и заключается, что на его членов нельзя влиять.

Сэр Магнус встал <…> и устремил на Адриана надменный взгляд.

- Вы не можете, - жестко произнес он, - подкупить присяжных (jury tampering). Это было бы неэтично. <…> Однако, - вкрадчиво добавил он, - поскольку в присяжные попадают люди, заведомо не блещущие умом, их мысли можно направить по нужному руслу. И моя обязанность, как у овчарки, направить моих курчавых присяжных ягнят в загон правильного решения.

(Джеральд Даррелл «Рози – моя родня»)