[BBC News] Dave Lee Travis - Jury

[Gatt]

I was reading the BBC news article about the starting of this case and what struck me was this:

 

Judge Anthony Leonard told the jury at Southwark Crown Court to try the case only on evidence heard during the trial.

 

He warned the jury of four men and eight women that there should be "no sleuthing" on the internet and said they could be jailed for contempt of court if they broke the rules.

*Emphasis Mine*

 

Given the charges against him - is this not just a little bit bias?

I have no idea whether he did or didn't - but surely they should have selected a jury with a 50/50 split of men & women?

 

Full Article: BBC News - Dave Lee Travis described as 'opportunist' sex offender

[tech_guy]

Isn't jury selection totally random?

[tmcd35]

Random selection:

 

BBC NEWS | UK | Magazine | How is a jury selected?

 

Could just have easily been an all male jury. There is no actual selection as such. The jurors don't even know what they will be judging until after they've been sworn in.

[sparkeh]

Sorry I don't understand how the charges and the gender ratio effect anything?

Are you saying he is more likely to be convicted if there are more women on the jury?!

[tmcd35]

Are you saying he is more likely to be convicted if there are more women on the jury?!

 

Haven't kept up with the story, but just read through the list of charges on the Beebs website. That said, and I'm tying to find a suitable link for this, but hasn't there been some research done state side that suggests Women jurors in rape cases are more likely to blame the victim so he'd be more likely acquitted with more female jurors?

[featured_spectre]

Juries get asked if they know the companies defending or prosecuting, if they know the defendant or any one due to be called, if they know the solicitor/QC/judge themselves and then they get told the trial details. Anyone who does know anyone personally within that defined parameters is excused to the next possible case.

[Gatt]

Sorry I don't understand how the charges and the gender ratio effect anything?

Are you saying he is more likely to be convicted if there are more women on the jury?!

 

You have to admit that it's a possibility

 

IMHO, a balanced jury of a random 6 men & 6 women (for any case) is much fairer than just randomly plucking out 12 people which could potentially sway the verdict.

[creese]

You have to admit that it's a possibility

 

IMHO, a balanced jury of a random 6 men & 6 women (for any case) is much fairer than just randomly plucking out 12 people which could potentially sway the verdict.

 

What about sexual orientation, race, political bias......

[sparkeh]

Haven't kept up with the story, but just read through the list of charges on the Beebs website. That said, and I'm tying to find a suitable link for this, but hasn't there been some research done state side that suggests Women jurors in rape cases are more likely to blame the victim so he'd be more likely acquitted with more female jurors?

Well that is (or was) the general thinking but research tends to say that is a myth: Rape court conviction myth questioned - Telegraph

You have to admit that it's a possibility

What about sexual orientation, race, political bias......

The random nature of the selection gives me confidence that the overall attitude of the jury is balanced. As @creese intimates, there are a lot of factors that make up someones attitude toward the accused other than gender.

[localzuk]

Gender is nearly entirely irrelevant. The process of random selection eliminates bias quite successfully.

 

The fact you noticed that the gender ratio is not matched does make me wonder about your attitudes towards women though. I'd not even have noticed those numbers! Women aren't all the same, just like men aren't.

 

The point that there are 12 jurors should level out any issues anyway.

[Gatt]

The fact you noticed that the gender ratio is not matched does make me wonder about your attitudes towards women though.

 

Not quite sure how to take that??

[localzuk]

Not quite sure how to take that??

 

That you have a view of women as maybe being more protective of children (which would be a bit of a stereotype). Not meaning to offend, just an analysis of what I might call a form of positive discrimination.

 

To counter it, my view of women might be swung wildly the opposite way, as a significant number of the women I know hate children etc...

[Gatt]

That you have a view of women as maybe being more protective of children (which would be a bit of a stereotype). Not meaning to offend, just an analysis of what I might call a form of positive discrimination.

 

To counter it, my view of women might be swung wildly the opposite way, as a significant number of the women I know hate children etc...

 

Ah rigth I'm with you - and I agree with your views on that for the same reason!