Jury Duty

Twelve strangers charged with the justice of the realm gather together at the round table. Sworn to secrecy, bound by honour and cloaked in chivalry, they shall not rest until their mission for the truth is complete. Armed not with swords of bows, these servants of her Majesty twiddle well-forged biros in their fingers and sip from goblets of Styrofoam. Their round table lies not in halls of Camelot, but deep within the bowels of the Downing Centre local court.

A great way to meet people from all walks of life, jury duty brings citizens together in an engaging and constructive manner...whether they like it or not. There are few certainties in life, however sooner or later the day will come when you find a jury summons in your letterbox. For some, jury duty is an inconvenience. For others, it is a much welcomed holiday. Yet for everyone, it is a test of patience as you fight the urge not to throttle the loudmouth troglodyte opposite you who demands an explanation as to why he cannot SMS his toothless, mutant girlfriend while in court.

Forced participation brings out the best in each of us; facial expressions around the room suggest the average person takes jury duty about as seriously as they do elections. The terrible inconvenience of the whole experience is quickly confirmed: “How will the salon cope without me?”; “What about my Zumba class?”; “Does this mean we can’t watch Kerry-Anne?” Depending on the crime, jury duty can be long and tedious; some trials last years with no verdict. Compared to the alternative, however, contributing to this system of justice seems the saner choice.

The people at Chum never saw it coming.

Prior to modern juries gaining popularity, methods of determining guilt could hardly be described as impartial. Medieval courts relied on god to determine the guilt of an individual. This was done by subjecting the accused to a horrible experience – such as retrieving a rock from a pot of boiling water – known as Trial by Ordeal. If the wounds began to heal in a few days, god had intervened. If the wound putrefied, then it’s into the pond with you. There was also Trial by Combat, in which god supported the winner of a holy bar fight – being weak and innocent was not so common.

Henry II – an English king none too fond of the church – created a whole new system of law in the 12^th century that was based on local customs and evened the odds a bit for the everyday man. Known as ‘Common Law’, he revived an old custom which involved using twelve men from each village to identify beefs between the locals when royal judges made their regular visits. Known as juries – from the Norman French juré or ‘sworn’ – these groups did the investigating, gathered evidence and were often directly involved with the crimes committed.

Today, juries have no involvement with investigating crimes, sitting only in judgement - the only ordeal being the week-old sandwiches. Juries are no longer exclusively wealthy landowners; they are snapshots of the community, whose decisions (hopefully) represent the values important to society as a whole. In turn, they illustrate how the biggest mouth in a group of twelve people is generally attached to the thickest skull. Despite the initial frustrations of being forced to compromise and to tolerate your fellow humans, jury duty is a satisfying experience which can enrich citizens as well as inconvenience them.