100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached
logo-home
WJEC Criminology Unit 3 AC2.5 full mark controlled assessment answer $6.16   Add to cart

Other

WJEC Criminology Unit 3 AC2.5 full mark controlled assessment answer

 128 views  2 purchases
  • Course
  • Institution

This is the write-up I used in my unit 3 controlled assessment for AC2.5. I got full marks overall. This is an example and should not be copied out in your exam.

Last document update: 1 year ago

Preview 1 out of 3  pages

  • August 18, 2023
  • August 18, 2023
  • 3
  • 2023/2024
  • Other
  • Unknown
avatar-seller
AC2.5
Laypeople are ordinary members of society with no specialised legal knowledge. Juries and
magistrates are both examples of laypeople.
Juries
Juries are made up of 12 laypeople randomly selected from the electoral register. They
listen to the evidence in court and decide whether the person on trial is guilty ‘beyond all
reasonable doubt’. The jury have a four-fold role where they have to: weigh evidence,
decide on which facts are true, listen to the judge’s direction on the law, and apply the facts
they hear to reach a verdict. People aged 18 to 75 are eligible to do jury duty. People are
excluded if they are on bail, on probation, or completing community service. Those who
have served over 5 years in jail are excluded for life whilst those with shorter sentences are
excluded for 10 years. Juries are used in cases involving serious offences and some triable-
either way offences, that are tried in the Crown Court. 95% of cases are tried in the
magistrates’ court but of the remaining 5% tried in the Crown Court, most involve the
defendant pleading guilty or the judge instructing that the jury to acquit them. So, juries
only actually make the decision in about 1% of cases (about 30,000 trials a year). The Jury
Act 1974 is the main act governing the jury system.
One strength of juries is that they have jury equity. This means that juries are allowed to
return verdicts that coincide with what they believe is morally right rather than by what is in
the law. This allows defendants to be judged on their specific circumstances rather than by
the law which is generalised. Kay Gilderdale was a mother who pleaded guilty to the
assisted suicide of her daughter but was instead charged with murder. At trial the jury
acquitted her as they believed she had done the right thing. This case was dependant on the
juries’ opinions which led to Kay avoiding jail time, as they thought she did the right thing,
and so found her not guilty. Another strength of juries is that they judge cases for fairly. A
study was done into whether juries were racially unbiased, involving interviews with over
1,000 jurors and looking at 68,000 jury verdicts. No link was found between all white juries
and a higher tendency to convict black or Asian defendants (in Winchester and Nottingham).
This information suggests that jurors treat defendants equally. Black, Asian, or minority
ethnic defendants often chose to be tried at the Crown Court, as they think they will get a
fairer trial here than at the magistrate’s court.
One weakness of juries is jury tampering. This is the use of bribery or intimidation of jurors,
perverting the course of justice. This is usually used to get a defendant acquitted. This
means that jurors sometimes need to be protected by the police using methods such as
accompanying them to court. In 2002, over £3.5 million was spent protecting juries. There
was suspected jury intimidation used in the Tony Martin case, a man who shot a burglar in
his home. This case was more unusual as intimation was allegedly used to get the jurors to
find him guilty, while usually intimidation is used to try and get a verdict of innocent. In this
case, Tony went to prison for 3 years. Perhaps the verdict would have been different if this
intimidation hadn’t happened. Another weakness of juries is media influence. A study into
whether juries are fair found that 35% remembered pre-trial coverage in high-profile cases

The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Guaranteed quality through customer reviews

Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.

Quick and easy check-out

Quick and easy check-out

You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.

Focus on what matters

Focus on what matters

Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!

Frequently asked questions

What do I get when I buy this document?

You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.

Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?

Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.

Who am I buying these notes from?

Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller rosie1245. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.

Will I be stuck with a subscription?

No, you only buy these notes for $6.16. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.

Can Stuvia be trusted?

4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)

77016 documents were sold in the last 30 days

Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now

Start selling
$6.16  2x  sold
  • (0)
  Add to cart