1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. UK.LEGAL.MODERATED

  • Juror psychologically damaged by wrongful verdict ?

    From Jethro_uk@21:1/5 to All on Sun Nov 19 12:04:51 2023
    Having just referenced the Andrew Malkinson case, it struck me that there
    has been little thought about the poor jurors who - given the criminally
    fiddle evidence and comedy investigation - returned a guilty verdict with
    the devastating effects it had on an innocent man.

    Obviously no one will ever be found liable for this, so I ask
    hypothetically, but if there were to be a successful prosecution for wrongdoing, would a juror have a potential claim against the convicted ?

    Or is there no psychological downside to having returned a life ruining
    verdict due to someone elses mendacity ?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Roger Hayter@21:1/5 to jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com on Sun Nov 19 12:31:15 2023
    On 19 Nov 2023 at 12:04:51 GMT, "Jethro_uk" <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com> wrote:

    Having just referenced the Andrew Malkinson case, it struck me that there
    has been little thought about the poor jurors who - given the criminally fiddle evidence and comedy investigation - returned a guilty verdict with
    the devastating effects it had on an innocent man.

    Obviously no one will ever be found liable for this, so I ask
    hypothetically, but if there were to be a successful prosecution for wrongdoing, would a juror have a potential claim against the convicted ?

    Or is there no psychological downside to having returned a life ruining verdict due to someone elses mendacity ?

    I imagine the damage to the juror would be considered too remote from the offence, or that the police owed no duty of care to the juror, or both. Otherwise I could claim for the psychological distress resulting from reading about the case in the newspaper.

    --
    Roger Hayter

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Jethro_uk@21:1/5 to Roger Hayter on Sun Nov 19 14:13:25 2023
    On Sun, 19 Nov 2023 12:31:15 +0000, Roger Hayter wrote:

    On 19 Nov 2023 at 12:04:51 GMT, "Jethro_uk" <jethro_uk@hotmailbin.com>
    wrote:

    Having just referenced the Andrew Malkinson case, it struck me that
    there has been little thought about the poor jurors who - given the
    criminally fiddle evidence and comedy investigation - returned a guilty
    verdict with the devastating effects it had on an innocent man.

    Obviously no one will ever be found liable for this, so I ask
    hypothetically, but if there were to be a successful prosecution for
    wrongdoing, would a juror have a potential claim against the convicted
    ?

    Or is there no psychological downside to having returned a life ruining
    verdict due to someone elses mendacity ?

    I imagine the damage to the juror would be considered too remote from
    the offence, or that the police owed no duty of care to the juror, or
    both. Otherwise I could claim for the psychological distress resulting
    from reading about the case in the newspaper.

    Were you forced under threat of prison to read the newspaper ?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)