9
submitted 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

According to my mum: "if you even miss a single day they throw the entire jury out and have to restart the whole court case again so that the new jurors can hear all the evidence". I feel that would make longer cases exponentially impractical.

I can't find anything about this on the internet, other than for someone asking this question in America.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

They might call in an alternate juror who went through jury selection and has heard the same evidence, but doesn't participate in deliberations unless they replace an original juror.

[ Disclaimer: I'm an American Idiot although I assume reserve jurors are common practice for courts ]

[-] [email protected] 3 points 4 months ago

Can confirm for the US at least, I was a backup juror a couple years ago in a rather dull civil case. It’s standard practice here to select 14 jurors so you have 12 plus two alternates. I sat and heard the whole case, then had lunch with the judge during deliberations where we chatted about how stupid the case was.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago

then had lunch with the judge during deliberations where we chatted about how stupid the case was.

I suspect they might see it as their duty to point out legal stupidity; if only just so that the jurors are not given a bad impression of the whole legal system.

this post was submitted on 14 Jan 2025
9 points (90.9% liked)

AusLegal

251 readers
1 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS