Support for Jurors

The Justice and Home Affairs Committee is undertaking a short investigation into support for jurors in England and Wales, focusing on the health and mental health impact of the experience of being a juror.

Respondents are welcome to address any of the questions mentioned below, but are not required to answer all of the questions. The Committee is particularly hoping to hear from those with experience of being a juror.

All witnesses are reminded that they should be careful not to comment on individual cases currently before a court or matters in respect of which court proceedings are imminent. The Committee is also keen to emphasise that, in line with the jurors’ oath, witnesses must avoid commenting on their specific experiences in the deliberating room as doing so constitutes an offence under s20D of the Juries Act 1974 as amended by s74 of the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015.

Guidance on submitting evidence can be found in the later pages of this form. We prefer to publish the evidence we receive, and most evidence received is published in full. In exceptional circumstances you can ask us to publish your submission without your name (anonymous evidence), or not publish it at all (confidential evidence). The committee decides whether and how evidence is published. These decisions are protected by parliamentary privilege and cannot be externally challenged.

If you have any questions or concerns regarding submitting evidence to the Committee, or if you would like to discuss your evidence ahead of submission, please contact the Committee staff by email HLJusticeHomeAffairs@parliament.uk or by telephoning 020 7219 6099.

Impact on jurors

1. What health and/or mental health impact does the experience of being a juror have on people? Are some categories of jurors (defined e.g. by age or past experience of criminality) particularly likely to be impacted? What data exists on this impact?

2. At the jury selection stage, how can individuals indicate concerns about the potentially distressing experience of being a juror, and how are such concerns responded to? What is the right balance between ensuring that juries reflect society and that potentially vulnerable jurors are not exposed to material that can adversely affect them?

3. How do different types of evidence (spoken, audio, video, physical) affect jurors, and has the nature of evidence to which juries are exposed changed in recent years? Is there prosecutorial, judicial or other guidance relating to the use of potentially distressing evidence, and how has it changed?

Support for jurors

4. What dedicated health and/or mental health support exists for juries before, during, and after trials? How does support for juries compare to support for others in the Criminal Justice System (e.g. police, lawyers, victims, judges, court staff)?

5. What responsibility does the state hold in relation to jurors’ wellbeing before, during, and after jury service, and where is that responsibility allocated?

6. What factors outside of the trial impact juror wellbeing (e.g. loss of income, logistics of attending and being at court) and what support is available?

Evidence base

7. What studies have been conducted (by the Government, devolved governments, or others) on support for jurors and what action is the Government taking? What interaction has there been between psychologists/health care professionals and governments or courts services on the impact of the experience of being a juror upon jurors?

8. What differences are there between England and Wales, Scotland, and Northern Ireland in relation to support for jurors, and are there lessons to be learned from them, or from common law jurisdictions outside the UK?

Juror support in the future

9. What alternative or additional support could be made available to jurors and what are the costs/implications of this support? How do current rules around discussing deliberations impact support available to jurors?

10. Are further rules or guidance required to ensure that jurors are not selected for trials that they are likely to find traumatic, or not exposed to potentially distressing evidence in ways that are unnecessary for the fair administration of justice? What form should such rules or guidance take?

The deadline for written submissions is 23.59 on Sunday 13 September.

The Justice and Home Affairs Committee is undertaking a short investigation into support for jurors in England and Wales, focusing on the health and mental health impact of the experience of being a juror.

Evidence goes to the committee through Parliament’s own form. There is no way to submit it from here: Parliament publishes no API for written evidence, so the button above opens the committee’s page.

What you send is published under your name and can be quoted in the committee’s report. Keep it under 3,000 words, send it as a document rather than a letter in the body of an email, and answer the questions above rather than writing generally.

The committee’s own address is HLJusticeHomeAffairs@parliament.uk, for a question about the inquiry or trouble with the form.