In a consultation paper produced jointly by the Home Office in conjunction with the Lord Chancellor's Department in February 1998, a number of alternatives were canvassed which retain the jury, but ensure that it would be better equipped to fulfil its role. Home Office/Lord Chancellor's Department, Juries in Serious Fraud Trials: Consultation Document, Chapter Special Juries Preamble

doi:10.4324/9781843143451-145

Chapter

In a consultation paper produced jointly by the Home Office in conjunction with the Lord Chancellor's Department in February 1998, a number of alternatives were canvassed which retain the jury, but ensure that it would be better equipped to fulfil its role. Home Office/Lord Chancellor's Department, Juries in Serious Fraud Trials: Consultation Document, Chapter Special Juries Preamble

Chapter

ABSTRACT

Chapter 4: Special Juries Preamble 4.1 The public can only be expected to retain confidence in the criminal justice

system if the tribunals which judge defendants are both competent to fulfil their duties and just in discharging them. Over the years, the competence of jurors in long and complex fraud trials has been questioned. It has been suggested that no jury could do a good job in the given circumstances. Other commentators, however, have suggested that jurors could do a good job in complex fraud trials if they were selected in a special way. These suggestions are discussed in this chapter under the broad heading of 'special juries'.