Jury research team appointed by Scottish Government

Two Glasgow University professors are among three academics appointed to carry out a research project for the Scottish Government into how juries reach their decisions, including their use of the "not proven" verdict.

Justice Secretary Michael Matheson confirmed that James Chalmers, Regius Professor of Law, and Fiona Leverick, Professor of Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, both at the University of Glasgow along with Professor Vanessa Munro of the University of Warwick, will work in collaboration with Ipsos Mori on the two year study.

Their research will consider jury size, decision making processes, majorities needed and the three verdict system, and will gather evidence to inform future reform of the criminal justice system in Scotland.

In particular it will seek to answer the questions identified by Lord Bonomy in his review of safeguards that would be needed if the corroboration rule is to be abolished:

• what jurors understand to be the difference between not guilty and not proven;
• why they choose one over the other;
• why, and to what extent, do jurors alter their position as regards not proven and not guilty as a result of deliberations;
• the extent to which the members of a jury of 15 (as compared with a jury of 12) actually participate in deliberations;
• the differences in outcome (assuming an identical factual matrix) as between a 12 person jury with only two possible verdicts and a 15 person jury with three verdicts, and the reasons for those differences; and
• whether there are benefits in requiring the jury to attempt to reach a unanimous verdict.

It will also include two additional topics:

• how information is conveyed to jurors; and
• whether pre-recorded evidence is assessed differently from evidence in open court – a question highly relevant to the Evidence & Procedure Review project currently being championed by the Lord Justice General and the Scottish Courts & Tribunals Service.

Ipsos Mori will engage several hundred members of the public to sit on mock juries, to attempt to assess how Scottish juries reach their decisions. Carrying out research with actual jury members would be impractical due to prohibitions in the Contempt of Court Act.

Mr Matheson commented: "This important research is a direct result of Lord Bonomy’s post-corroboration safeguards review in which he recommended that research should be carried out to ensure that any changes to our jury system are made only on a fully informed basis, including the impact having a three verdict system has on decision making.

"The Ipsos Mori team will work in collaboration with three respected academics and will use case simulations rather than real jurors. Their findings will help inform any future decisions that may be taken in relation to potential reforms of our criminal justice system."

Professor Chalmers added: "Research with mock juries has been used around the world to inform criminal justice reform, but the Scottish jury is so different from juries in other countries there are limits to what can be learned from all this work. This study will help us understand just what difference the special features of the Scottish jury system make in practice."