Trials without jury ‘will lead to wrong verdicts’
Plans to allow serious and complex fraud trials to be heard by a judge without a jury could lead to an increase in miscarriages of justice, a pressure group has warned.
Legal and human rights organisation Justice said the government’s measures, which have already been passed in legislation but not yet brought in, could lead to wrongful convictions and an increase in the number of appeals.
A committee of MPs is due to begin to consider the proposals tomorrow, but the final plans will have to be agreed by both Houses of Parliament.
Last month, the government was asked by attorney general Lord Goldsmith QC to approve moves to allow complicated fraud trials to be heard by a judge sitting without a jury. The powers would apply in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Lord Goldsmith’s official spokesman has said that, if the plans are approved, judges could sit alone in serious fraud cases from January 2006. The move is likely to involve between 15 and 20 cases a year.
But Justice spokeswoman Sally Ireland said: “The need to convince 10 ordinary people of guilt is an essential safeguard. We lose juries at our peril.”
She said it would lead to a decline in public confidence in verdicts and make it harder to maintain the high criminal standard of proof in serious fraud cases.
Ms Ireland added: “Judge alone trials will only require that one person is convinced of guilt. Further, that person will be ‘case-hardened’. The small number of cases heard by juries during their service is an important way in which the criminal standard of proof is preserved.”
The move to curb jury trials comes after a series of high-profile complex fraud cases which faltered at huge cost to the taxpayer. In June this year a fraud case involving five Manchester-based businessmen collapsed, at a cost of £65 million.
