Here is a description of the jury study released by the United Kingdom's Ministry of Justice.
The full report can be accessed here.
Are juries fair?by Cheryl Thomas, Professor at the Centre for Empirical Legal Studies at University College London, is a two-year long survey of more than 1,000 jurors at Crown Courts and a separate study of over 68,000 jury verdicts.
In the report, sensitive issues about jury decision-making have been tackled for the first time.
It reveals that:
- all-white juries do not discriminate against defendants from black and minority ethnic (BME) backgrounds
- juries almost always reach a verdict and convict two-thirds of the time
- there are no courts where juries acquit more often than convict.
It also shows that:
- jurors want more information about how to do their job
- written instructions improve jurors’ legal understanding of cases
- some jurors use the internet to look for information about their case
- some jurors find media reports of their case difficult to ignore.
Professor Thomas said:
‘This research shows that juries in England and Wales were found to be fair, effective and efficient – and should lay to rest any lingering concerns that racially-balanced juries are needed to ensure fairness in trials with BME defendants or racial evidence.
‘But it is also clear from the research that jurors want and need better information to perform this crucial role. The study recommends that all sworn jurors be issued with written guidelines explaining what improper conduct is, including use of the internet, and how and when to report it. The study also recommends that judges consider issuing jurors with written instructions on the law to be applied in each case. Both changes will help maintain the integrity of the jury system.’
The study tackles racial discrimination, jury conviction rates, juror comprehension and improper conduct, juror use of the internet and media coverage of jury trials.