Chip

Theyve been out for 3 days now and still cant agree on a unanamous verdict. What will happen if after a few more days they still cant agree. Will there be a re-trial or what.

Chip.

Buckrogers

Never heard of a re-trial on the basis that the jury cannot agree.

I think that they have to come to an agreement and they can reconvene before the judge to ask for guidance on any aspects of law.

I could be wrong though!

Luke

They get paid for a few more days... why not!!

Redkop

I thought that the Judge had said it had to be a unanimous decision

Brit_in_Japan

The judge can ask for a majority decision I think, minimum 10-2. If jury is still hung then it's likely in a case like this that it would go for a retrial.

Scooby96

Yep re-trial me thinks

seejay555

Pretty sure murder conviction needs to be a unanimous verdict. They could convict of manslaughter on a majority.

Scooby96

doesnt that depend on the direction of the judge - pretty sure a 10/2 ratio will suffice???

andrew6321

if not unanimous then the judge will probably have to accept a majority verdict....

either that, or plod will have to go out and find someone else to pin it on...

Either way, the case is obviously not as clear-cut as the newpapers would have you believe...

JohnMcC

As Redkop has mentioned, I think the judge has said that he needs them to come back with a unanimous decision to convict.

Tiggs

must all agree- this is very clear in judges summing up.

Redkop

Taken from Guardian Unlimited

During his closing speech Mr Coward told the jury they could reach three verdicts - that Mr Huntley was guilty of murder or manslaughter or that he was innocent


Soham trial jurors sent home

Tuesday December 16, 2003

The jurors in the Soham murder trial were today sent home after failing to reach a verdict during their third day of deliberations.
Ian Huntley, 29, is accused of murdering 10-year-old schoolgirls Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman after they entered his home in the Cambridgeshire town on August 4 last year.

Mr Huntley's former girlfriend, 26-year-old Maxine Carr, is accused of perverting the course of justice and assisting an offender.

The jurors, who have now deliberated for more than 16 hours in total, were dismissed by the trial judge, Mr Justice Moses, at 4pm.

Before sending them home, the judge as usual warned them not to discuss the case with each other or anybody else until returning to the jury room tomorrow morning.

The seven female and five male jurors were first sent out on Friday morning after the judge completed his summing-up of the 27-day case. He told the jury that verdicts on all charges would have to be unanimous

Scooby96

Heres the problem:

The seven female....

jasey

Trying to get 7 females to agree - No chance !

jasey

Jinx

damian666

Scooby96, all joking aside, I was the one that didnt agree when I did jury service (unsurprisingly, I wanted to convict the barsteward!)

The 'asking a judge' about the law thing happened in my trial too - although to ask if 'promoting the course of justice' was a benefit to the defendant

Bloody coffin dodgers!

Damo

mart360

The tricky point on this one is that there are no witness's and no evidence to link him to the murders ( as in the house had no dna fibres etc) he admitted stopping the breathing of one of the girls,by accident, and neglecting the other so she drowned..

i believe they were instructed that they could find him guilty of murder by gross negligance...

the only person who knows is huntley himself, and he,s staying tight lipped...

imho i think he will get found guilty of murder by gross neglegance, and manslaughter on the other..

carr i think will get guilty on perverting the course,, but may serve a minimal sentance given that she has been in custody for so long...

lets hope justice is done


,mart

jasey

I've got a horrible feeling that they are both gonna get off not-guilty.

Just a feeling

David Lock

Well I don't have any "reasonable doubts". DL

carl

Well you might not have any "reasonable doubts" and to be honest I thought the defence was laughable. If I'd been there, I'm pretty sure I'd have asked if that was the best they could have come up with in 18 months. Is his lawyer particularly cheap or inexperienced?

Anyway, what the jury have to decide is guilt or innocence on the basis of the evidence presented. To be honest, if I was on the jury that would be a much harder decision. It seems ludicrously unlikely, but it could all have been some bizarre accident as claimed. I'm not sure where the prosecution was heading in its summing up with this "sexual motive", as although it seems an obvious conclusion (adult bloke with "previous", two young girls) there was no evidence presented to support it

I am also somewhat confused as to the references to Huntley being charged with rape in the past. He was acquitted, so why bring it up?

David_Wallis

could it be that they are not sure if maxine is guilty???

David

Chris L

My thoughts exactly David. I think one decision will be fairly straightforward for the jury. The other is not so clear cut.

Chris

David Lock

Carl, I understand what you are saying and, of course, you are right in that there is no absolute evidence. On the other hand two kids went into his house alive and tragically died. I stand by my very personal view that I have no reasonable doubt that he killed them deliberately. But it is a lot easier tapping into a keyboard than being a juror. Nonetheless I didn't post lightly. Maybe because I have two kids. DL

Father Jack Hackett

I think the rape thing was raised by Carr's defence: they say she lied because he had been "fitted up" before and didn't want it to happen again.

(BTW, Brit-In_Japan - what are you doing in Nagoya? Whereabouts do you live?)

DrJP

They were back in court this morning and admitted that they couldn't reach a unanimous decision and therefore a majority is acceptable if 11 to 1 or 10 to 2.

weapon69

Verdict just in.

Huntley-Guilty
Carr-Not guilty

Brit_in_Japan

FJH - Not in Nagoya itself, but not far away by JR. Are you in Craggy Island, Aichi-ken ?