Criminology Unit 3 controlled assessment- AC 2.5 model answer

For those taking their year 13 Criminology controlled assessment, this is the perfect place to come. These are my exact answers that achieved me 100/100 marks on the controlled assessment. This resource covers AC 2.5 . An extremely well developed and elaborate exam answer! Please note that this covers the 2019/2020 spec

Discuss the use of lay people in criminal cases

Juries

Jury are present during a court procedure and are in charge of determining the verdict in the

case. The eligibility for jury selection is found within the Jury Act 1974 and the Criminal

Justice Act 2003. Jurors are randomly selected, between the ages of 18 and 75 and have no

criminal convictions.As they have no legal knowledge, they are guided by the judge who

offers points of law.The verdict given cannot be questioned. Due to the seriousness of court

procedures, jury duty is compulsory unless under extreme personal circumstances.

Juries allow uphold the right to a fair trial and impartiality, with the jury system being popular

with members of the public.The right to be tried by our peers is a key part of court history

and is viewed as a demoncratic right.With there being 12 people on every jury, it means no

one individual is responsible for the verdict and allows for a more thorough examination of

evidence with numerous opinions considered.Therefore, if the defendant is found guilty by

12 people who represent the UK population, with all opinion and evidence considered, it is

likely that the verdict is safe and of public opinion. Having 12 jury members also reduces

prejudice and means no one person can be held accountable in the case of a wrong verdict.

In addition, jury deliberations are held in secret in a protected room and members of the jury

cannot be expected to explain their verdict.This may encourage the jury to choose a verdict

that is not popular with the public with the knowledge that they can't be arrested or

questioned about the choice they made.This also helps them be impartial, upholding the

right to an impartial jury.

Sometimes, juries will bring their own beliefs and fairness when deliberating a case, which is

known as jury equity.For example, when considering whether a defendant is guilty or

innocent, they will consider morals rather than points of law.This was seen in the case of R V

Owen where the defendants son was killed by a wreckless driver who's truck was not

roadworthy or insured.The driver was also blind and did not have a driving license.Own shot

the driver of the truck and was charged with attempted murder.Despite the fact Own was

obviously guilty, the jury acquited him based on morals, with some jury members later

congratulating him, many believing they would have done the same.In addition to this, in the

case of R v Ponting, Ponting found evidence that the government had lied to the public

about the sinking of a ship durng the Fawklands war, and sent this document to an opposing

party so the issue would be discussed in parliament. He was charged under the Secrets Act,

however he was found not guilty as the jury believed that this information should have been

made public and he made the right choice in releasing the document.In both of these cases,

the jury have fought against the law and handed the defendant an innocent verdict despite

the fact they are obviously guilty.This is a strength of the jury because it demonstrates how

justice is upheld in different ways; if the judge had considered the verdict the defendants

would have been found guilty under the law, but as the jury's verdict stands, the defendants

cannot be charged for the crime

However, many of the strengths of juries can also become weaknesses.For example, as the

jury don't have to explain their verdicts, they may deliberately pursue their own interests and

1 / 1

Criminology Unit 3 controlled assessment- AC 2.5 model answer

Categories