Regina v Durrant: CACD 6 Mar 1998

The foreman of the jury effectively indicated that there was no reasonable prospect of the jury reaching an agreed verdict, but the judge interrupted saying that he would ask them to retire again for a while and read out verbatim the Watson direction. Then the trial judge said: ‘With that therefore may I ask you to carry on for a little bit longer to see if you can reach the necessary degree of you unanimity, at least ten. Thank you very much.’
Held: The appeal failed. Waller LJ said: ‘The only question is, as it seems to us, whether there is anything in Mr Taylor’s argument that, because of the intervention of the foreman indicating that at that stage he did not think that there was a reasonable prospect of reaching a verdict, plus a reference to ‘again retire for a little while’ there was any pressure put on the jury. We have to say that we simply do not follow how that can be so. The fact that the foreman is indicating that at that stage he does not think there was a reasonable prospect, as it seems to us, is no reason at all why the judge should not say to the jury, as in effect he was, ‘I do want you to go out and consider the matter for some further time’ and his reference to ‘again for a little while’ and ‘for a little bit longer’ and his acceptance that, if they cannot agree, then that would be accepted, as it seems to us is doing exactly what the direction is designed to do, ie indicate to the jury: ‘Please think about it again, but, if you cannot agree, then that decision of yours will be accepted’. As we see it (in agreement, we should say, with the single judge) we do not think that there is any merit in the Watson direction point.’

Judges:

Waller LJ

Citations:

[1998] EWCA Crim 833

Jurisdiction:

England and Wales

Citing:

CitedRegina v Watson CACD 1988
The court indicated how a jury might be directed in the event of an apparent deadlock, given two public interests which tend to pull in opposite directions: (i) the imperative that a jury should be put under no pressure; and (ii) the desirability of . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.

Criminal Practice

Updated: 11 October 2022; Ref: scu.153707