Exploring lawyers’ perspectives of jury engagement

Jurors have been described as passive decision-makers cast into the role of ‘potted courtroom plants’ (Damaška), but literature suggests that active juries are more effective than passive juries (Schäfer and Wiegand). This research investigates the extent to which jurors’ involvement in the trial corresponds with the normative theory of the trial as a communicative process in which the defendant is called to account (Duff et al). It explores the extent to which jurors are engaged in the dialogue of the criminal trial in practice.

The traditional model of the jury trial is under pressure. Technological changes, including the ease of mobile internet access and social media, and the advent of Gen AI, present ever-increasing opportunities for digital misconduct. Fast-paced, crime television dramas skew reality and can pose problems in terms of managing juror expectations and behaviours. Changing social values present challenges in terms of managing jury dynamics.

Drawing on preliminary findings from semi structured interviews with criminal practitioners, this research investigates lawyers’ perspectives of jury engagement in the trial process. As advocates seeking to persuade a jury in a trial, criminal practitioners have a valuable insight into the trial process and jury engagement. The findings explore how these modern jury challenges impact jury engagement. Ultimately, as this research develops, procedural justice theory (Tyler) will be used as a lens to explore whether lawyers’ views legitimise the jury as a fair tribunal of fact.