The jury returned after three hours retirement and said they had not reached a verdict. The judge did not give a majority direction, but a somewhat garbled version of a Walhein direction. The clerk asked the foreman whether the jury had reached a verdict on which at least 10 had agreed and the foreman answered ‘Yes’. The clerk asked the foreman, ‘Do you find the defendant guilty or not guilty upon this indictment?’ and the foreman answered ‘Guilty.’ It appears that the clerk then asked in the form of a question, ‘And that is the verdict of 10 of you?’ to which an answer if given was not recorded. Defence counsel attempted to regularise the position, but in vain. It was accordingly plain that the foreman had not stated in open court the number of jurors who respectively agreed to, and dissented from.
Held: The governing section was mandatory and the majority verdict was unlawful and could not be allowed to stand.
Citations:
[1975] 1 WLR 1190
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Regina v Millward CACD 7-Apr-1998
The defendant was tried for causing grievous bodily harm. After a majority direction, the jury returned, finding him guity. When asked if this was ‘the verdict of you all’, the formean replied ‘Yes’. The day after, he wrote to the judge to say that . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Criminal Practice
Updated: 25 November 2022; Ref: scu.192257
