Blaming the Jury

Frauds on Trial

Bibliographic Data

ID11448641
AuthorsMichael Levi (0000-0003-2131-2882, corresponding author)
Year1983
Volume10
Issue2
Pages257
Publication date1983-01-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueJournal of Law and Society (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0263-323X • E-ISSN: 1467-6478
PublisherJSTOR (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.2307/1410235
OpenAlexW2324057733
LanguageEN
Citations received3
References cited3

In the past decade, attacks upon the jury as an institution subversive to the imporant social goal of the repression of crime have intensified considerably. As the potential social control risks of the democratisation of the jury have become apparent, in Britain at least, juries have been condemned for their alleged lack of commitment to legal values and for their susceptibility to bribery.[1] Somewhat paradoxically, in view of the relatively small number of major cases that are prosecuted annually, one of the key areas of attack has been the suitability of the jury for the trial of commercial frauds. The aim of this article is to examine (a) the history of fraud trials as a social and legal problem and (b) the justifications for reform, including an analysis of the length and acquittal rates of fraud trials. This is of considerable practical as well as sociological importance, for fraud is the area where there is the highest level agreement about the inappropriateness of jury trial. Although commercial fraud generally is depicted as an offence sui generis, it is important to think through what precedents are likely to be set for other offences if the right to jury trial for fraud is abrogated

Computer security · Criminology · Jury · Jury trial · Political science · Computer Science · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Jury Decision Making Processes · Law · Law in Society and Culture · Psychology

Tools

Open DOISci-Hub