The UK government is considering ending jury trials for all cases except rape, murder, and manslaughter, sparking significant concern from legal professionals. Justice Secretary David Lammy's proposal aims to address the staggering backlog of 78,000 trials awaiting hearings in crown courts. However, critics argue that this move jeopardizes an 800-year-old judicial principle rooted in the Magna Carta, which mandates trial by peers.

 

Delays in the justice system, exacerbated by overburdened courts, have led to serious cases like attempted murder being postponed, with trial dates set as far ahead as 2029. Despite these challenges, there is scant evidence that judge-only trials would effectively resolve such delays. Concerns also arise from the UK's lack of judicial diversity, posing potential risks of bias in judge-led trials.

 

Countries like France, which do not use juries, face similar systemic issues. Notably, research by Cheryl Thomas, a judicial studies professor, indicates that juries do not disproportionately convict ethnic minorities; however, judges have shown a tendency to issue harsher sentences to non-white offenders. This raises fears that removing jury trials could exacerbate inequalities in the justice system.

 

A survey of criminal barristers revealed almost 90% oppose reducing the right to a jury trial, emphasizing the importance of maintaining public trust in a fair judicial process. Additionally, Richard Atkinson, a former Law Society president, cautions against undermining judicial fairness, noting the absence of evidence that eliminating juries would clear backlogs by 2030.

The Sun's investigation at Wood Green Crown Court highlighted extensive delays, with cases scheduled years into the future.

 

Judges face infrastructural challenges, such as insufficient courtrooms and maintenance issues, further complicating trial schedules. This has led to cancellations and delays even in serious cases, emphasizing the systemic nature of the crisis.

Beyond logistical hurdles, some court facilities struggle with basic functionality—Harrow Crown Court's closure due to structural issues exemplifies ongoing barriers to efficient justice delivery. The Ministry of Justice acknowledges the courts' crisis and insists on the need for bold actions, although no final decision on jury trials has been made.

 

While Lammy's proposal aims to alleviate court congestion, it faces widespread skepticism from the legal community. Critics argue that maintaining the jury system is crucial for ensuring fair trials, particularly for complex cases where a broad perspective is invaluable.

 

 

Key Takeaways

• Proposal to limit jury trials raises concerns over fairness and justice.
• Current court backlogs highlight systemic issues in need of resolution.
• Legal community emphasizes preserving jury trials as vital to justice.

 

 

 

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from Daily Mail 2025-11-28

 

 

 

 

Soon to come in the country in which you were born ..........

"In a dystopian future, Joseph Dredd, the most famous Judge (a police officer with instant field judiciary powers)"

Link to The Law Society regarding the above:

 

https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/criminal-bar-says-no-to-curbs-on-jury-trials/5124062.article

 

Extract From Article:

 

 

The survey, carried out by Professor Katrin Hohl, was open only for a week but attracted 2,029 responses. 'This may be an indication of the strength of feeling at the criminal bar and desire to have their voices heard and listened to as the government considers the Leveson proposals,' Hohl said.

We already knew barristers (and solicitors) were criminals!

 

How many of these cases are so important charges cannot simply be dropped?

 

Trial by jury is fundamental to human rights.

The real foundation was the 1215 Magna Carta (Article 39):“No free man shall be … imprisoned … except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.”This is the first explicit legal guarantee of judgment by peers (jury trial) in English law.Practical widespread use:

From the 13th century (1200s) onward, juries of 12 became the standard for serious criminal cases.

By the 14th century it was the dominant method for felonies.

 

So its worked for hundreds of years and now they want to change it?

 

it's an erosion of a 800-year Magna Carta bedrock of justice, risking bias (judges are less diverse than juries, per Lammy's own 2017 review), more miscarriages, and lower public trust.

Backlogs stem from chronic underfunding, not juries; fix that instead. Backlash is fierce from lawyers, bar, and opposition.

Usually, trials with juries are for felonies. Misdemeanors are handled by magistrates. Whichever, they need more of both.

On 11/29/2025 at 11:52 AM, CharlieH said:

The UK government is considering ending jury trials for all cases except rape, murder, and manslaughter,

This is fake news, it was only suggested by one MP David Lammy they are not considering it at all IMO

 

 

Lammy trying to take the UK back to the dark ages, in the name of being "Progressive".

 

He obviously knows most UK judges in Britain's 2 tier justice system are left leaning. 

The sooner we ditch these overpaid, often ideological loons with a well developed AI system the better. 

Disgusting how long people have to wait for "justice" and all the BS, wigs and nth degree crass involved. 

Challenge will be to implement an AI based process free of left wing bias. 

On 11/29/2025 at 11:52 AM, CharlieH said:

sparking significant concern from legal professionals

Yeah that'll make their gravy train dry up......

2 hours ago, Donga said:

The sooner we ditch these overpaid, often ideological loons with a well developed AI system the better. 

 

The only way they'd allow AI is if they found a way to get Owen Jones to write the algorithms. 

 

9 hours ago, brian69 said:

This is fake news, it was only suggested by one MP David Lammy they are not considering it at all IMO

 

 

It is not fake news. David Lammy is the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor. This was a serious proposal and certainly not fake news

2 hours ago, Geoff914 said:

It is not fake news. David Lammy is the Secretary of State for Justice and Lord Chancellor. This was a serious proposal and certainly not fake news

Yes a proposal not a law and won't be......

23 hours ago, brian69 said:

Yes a proposal not a law and won't be......

So it isn't going to happen https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn5lxg2l0lqo

Is is too late to put money on this?