Editing Jury trial (section)

===United Kingdom===
{{See also|Rights of Englishmen|Privilege of peerage # Trial by peers}}
The [[United Kingdom]] consists of three separate [[List of national legal systems|legal jurisdictions]], but there are some features common to all of them. In particular there is seldom anything like the U.S. [[voir dire]] system; jurors are usually just accepted without question. Controversially, in [[England]] there has been some screening in sensitive security cases, but the [[Courts of Scotland|Scottish courts]] have firmly set themselves against any form of jury vetting.

====England and Wales====

{{Main|Juries in England and Wales|History of trial by jury in England}}

In [[England and Wales]] (which have the same legal system), everyone accused of an offence which carries more than six months' imprisonment has a right to trial by jury. Minor ("summary") criminal cases are heard without a jury in the [[Magistrates' court (England and Wales)|Magistrates' Courts]]. Middle-ranking ("triable either way") offences may be tried by magistrates or the defendant may elect trial by jury in the [[Crown Court]]. Serious ([[indictment|"indictable-only"]]) offences, however, must be tried before a jury in the Crown Court. Juries sit in few civil cases, being restricted to false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, and civil fraud (unless ordered otherwise by a judge). Juries also sit in [[coroner]]'s courts for more contentious inquests. All criminal juries consist of 12 jurors, those in a County Court having 8 jurors and Coroner's Court juries having between 7 and 11 members. Jurors must be between 18 and 75 years of age, and are selected at random from the register of voters. In the past a unanimous verdict was required. This has been changed<ref>{{cite web|title=Criminal Justice Act 1967|url=http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1967/80/section/13/enacted|access-date=2013-01-07}}</ref> so that, if the jury fails to agree after a given period, at the discretion of the judge they may reach a verdict by a 10–2 majority. This was designed to make it more difficult for [[jury tampering]] to succeed.

In 1999 the [[Home Secretary]] [[Jack Straw]] introduced a controversial bill to limit the right to trial by jury.<ref name= "BBC3">{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/527721.stm | work=BBC News | title=Straw on trial over jury reform | date=1999-11-19 | access-date=2010-05-07}}</ref> This became the [[Criminal Justice Act 2003]], which sought to remove the right to trial by jury for cases involving jury tampering or complex fraud. The provision for trial without jury to circumvent jury tampering succeeded and came into force in 2007; the provision for complex fraud cases was defeated. [[Peter Goldsmith, Baron Goldsmith|Lord Goldsmith]], the then [[Attorney General for England and Wales|Attorney General]], then pressed forward with the [[Fraud (Trials Without a Jury) Bill]] in Parliament, which sought to abolish jury trials in major criminal fraud trials.<ref>{{cite news|title=No-jury trial plan 'presses on'|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4471718.stm|work=BBC News | date=2005-11-26 | access-date=2010-03-24 | location=London}}</ref> The Bill was subject to sharp criticism from both sides of the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]] before passing its second Commons reading in November 2006 but was defeated in [[House of Lords|the Lords]] in March 2007.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4456622.stm|title=Non-jury trial plans under fire|work=BBC News | date=2005-11-21 | access-date=2010-03-24 | location=London}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6195852.stm|title=Commons passes jury-less trials|work=BBC News | date=2006-11-29 | access-date=2010-03-24 | location=London}}</ref><ref name= "BBC4">{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6472755.stm | work=BBC News | title=Lords defeat no-jury trials plan | date=2007-03-20 | access-date=2010-05-07}}</ref>

The trial for the first serious offence to be tried without a jury in 350 years was allowed to go ahead in 2009.<ref name= "BBC1">{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8106590.stm | work=BBC News | title=First trial without jury approved | date=2009-06-18 | access-date=2010-05-07}}</ref> Three previous trials of the defendants had been halted because of jury tampering and the [[Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales|Lord Chief Justice]], [[Igor Judge, Baron Judge|Lord Judge]], cited cost and the additional burden on the jurors as reasons to proceed without a jury. Previously in cases where jury tampering was a concern the jurors were sometimes closeted in a hotel for the duration of the trial. [[Liberty (advocacy group)|Liberty]] director of policy Isabella Sankey said that "This is a dangerous precedent. The right to jury trial isn't just a hallowed principle but a practice that ensures that one class of people don't sit in judgement over another and the public have confidence in an open and representative justice system."<ref name= "BBC1" />

The trial started in 2010, with the four defendants convicted on 31 March 2010 by [[Colman Treacy|Mr Justice Treacy]] at the Old Bailey.<ref name= "BBC2">{{cite news| url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8453318.stm | work=BBC News | title=First no-jury crime trial begins | date=2010-01-12 | access-date=2010-05-07}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Armed raiders jailed after trial without jury|url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/armed-raiders-jailed-after-trial-without-jury-1932167.html|publisher= The Independent (UK) | date=2010-03-31 | access-date=2010-03-31 | location=London | first=Mark | last=Hughes}}</ref>

====Gibraltar====
Being a Common Law jurisdiction, Gibraltar retains jury trial in a similar manner to that found in [[England and Wales]], the exception being that juries consist of nine lay people, rather than twelve.

====Scotland====
{{main|Trial by jury in Scotland}}
In Scots law the jury system has some similarities with England but some important differences; in particular, there are juries of 15 in criminal trials, with verdicts by simple majority.

====Northern Ireland====
In [[Northern Ireland]], the role of the jury trial is roughly similar to England and Wales, except that jury trials have been replaced in cases of alleged [[terrorism|terrorist]] offences by courts where the judge sits alone, known as ''[[Diplock courts]]''. Diplock courts are common in Northern Ireland for crimes connected to terrorism.<ref>{{cite news | title= Two jailed for life for killing policeman Stephen Carroll | url= http://www.itv.com/news/2012-03-30/two-jailed-for-life-for-killing-policeman-stephen-carroll/ | work= [[ITV (TV network)|ITV]] News | date= 30 March 2012 | quote= They were tried in a 'diplock court' by a judge with no jury; common in Northern Ireland for crimes connected to terrorism.}}</ref>

Diplock courts were created in the 1970s during [[The Troubles]], to phase out [[Operation Demetrius]] internments, and because of the argument that juries were intimidated, though this is disputed. The Diplock courts were shut in 2007, but between 1 August 2008 and 31 July 2009, 13 non-jury trials were held, down from 29 in the previous year, and 300 trials per year at their peak.<ref>{{cite news | title= Non-jury trial option 'essential' says Goggins | date= 3 March 2010 | work= [[BBC News]] | url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/8547292.stm}}</ref>