An attachment was ordered against the jurors for determining their verdict by hustling half-pence in a hat ; one of them had discovered the matter, and sworn it ; the eleven others denied it upon oath ; but it was proved that four of them had confessed it. Eyre moved, that proceedings on attachment might be staid on payment of costs to both parties, without the attendance of the jurors in Court, who lived in Yorkshire; and alleged, that, only one of the jurors attended in a like case of Parr and Soames. Per Cur’ : Let the jurors all attend to be publickly admonished, that the country may take warning. Chapple for defendant.
Citations:
[1790] EngR 1055, (1732, 1756, 1790) Bar N 32, (1790) 94 ER 791 (G)
Links:
Cited by:
Cited – Attorney General v Fraill and Another CACD 16-Jun-2011
Juror’s use of Facebook was contempt
The court considered whether a juror had committed contempt of court. She had communicated with a defendant via Facebook, despite explicit warnings not to use the internet.
Held: Both juror and defendant in the trial had committed contempt of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Contempt of Court, Criminal Practice
Updated: 05 May 2022; Ref: scu.364108
