Jurors aren’t impartial – that’s exactly why they are so important to justice.

Description

David Lammy's proposals for judge-only trials in less serious offences aim to clear the 78,000-case Crown Court backlog. But what are we trading away?

Our research on serious criminal cases reveals what jury deliberation actually provides:

🗣️ Collective scrutiny - 12 diverse perspectives must defend their reasoning to equals with the same decision-making authority

⚖️ Transparent challenge - harmful assumptions get exposed and countered in real-time deliberation

🔍 Bias as strength - individual biases become visible and contestable through collective negotiation

Yes, juries bring bias. But that's precisely what makes them essential to justice, their diversity acts as a hedge against the biases any single decision-maker holds unchallenged.

As we debate efficiency versus fairness, we need to understand what we lose when we lose the jury.

My latest piece on why collective deliberation matters in criminal justice.