The Book of Ashes

Justice for all... (continued) 10:07PM

I bet a few people thought of Metallica with a title like that. This entry continues my write up of my Jury service.

Thursday: So Thursday we were right into it. An early start to hear evidence given by video link up in the UK. First off one of the Jury members didn't turn up (the train in front of her one ran out of gas and had to be pushed to the station). Then the video thing didn't go ahead. It was a long day.

The case was about a woman who was boarding with a family (a mother and 4 kids) in Masterton. The woman was accused of two charges of assault against the oldest two kids (about 11 & 9). It turned out to actually be sexually touching and being involved with the kids but they didn't have the right law (at the time) to charge her with that so it came down to assault, which according to the judge can be the merest of touches if it is unwanted such as a kiss.

So that day we spent watching video interviews of the kids. It was a long day but we started to get a feel for the case.

Friday: We were in early again for the video link up to the UK. They finished off the evidence then summed up after lunch time. The defense didn't bring up the accused to the stand, nor did they put up any real explanation except for the fact that it was two young boys and you couldn't trust their evidence. So it was laid out for us, the accused dosen't need to supply a defense (at all), it is up to the procescution to bring enough evidence for the jury to believe that the act was done (beyond resonable doubt). The kids were too young to have consented to anything (below the age of 14, no arguements there, we were shown their birth certificates) and it was really just a question of did this woman do it.

It is never really that simple. In the video interviews the oldest kid first denies anything having happened. He is quite defensive (swearing and saying eww yuk). Then later he comes back in and says a lot more. The younger kid says a lot but you don't know how much is exageration. We are told that due to the age of the kids they can't pinpoint an exact date nor can we rely on everything they say as being 100% true. We have to look at the big picture and work out what is true and what is not.

So back to the jury room. Most of us think she did something to both the kids. Its hard to pinpoint what so we go over the evidence. We can't give a verdict on our feelings it has to add up. But there is a lot of indecision. We got quite hooked up on the fact that the boy seemed to participate willingly and to enjoy it (although he was very embarrased afterwards).

Dinner time comes around. We are taken out in a big group down Lambton quay to a all you can eat buffet. Its interesting. We're not allowed to talk to anyone we know on the street and we all have to stay together, even to the point of squishing 14 of us in a lift together. We find out that if we stay too late then we get a motel room together and we go back at it the next day. I start wondering if you get given tooth brushes or PJs or if you have to wear the same stinky underwear the next day.

So we get back to it. The is still indecision and a lot of hang up on small facts that are not relevant. Finally it is laid out to us by the judge that if we find that she did it then the defense has not argued that they consented. They are too young, we just have to decide if she did it or not.

So eventually we reach a verdict of guilty for the oldest boy and not guilty for the youngest. The youngest was not guilty on lack of evidence. We finished up that night at around 9:30pm and I was pretty damn buggered.

So all in all the experience was quite interesting but very tiring. I liken it to a full day of uni lectures, you sit there, have to stay awake and you take notes. However its someones future on the line so you have to stay away and pay attention.

I found it interesting to meet the 11 other people and get to know them a little. I also found myself feeling a little out of my depth. I kind of liken it to a medium IT company getting 12 random people together, running them through all the pros and cons of different network setups then getting them to decide on one for the company to go with. Sure we had people leading us on matters of law but you do feel a little unqualified for such decisions. I guess the point is that out of 12 people there has to be enough common sense to win out.