Steven Price

My book

Media Minefield

Guide to NZ Media Law

Official Information Act

Official Information Act

Bill of Rights Act

Media law resources

Feeds (RSS)

« | Main | »

Pannick time!

By Steven | May 29, 2009

David Pannick QC agrees with me (though there may be some chance that he does not read this blog and reached his conclusion independently) that the rules about interviewing jurors are too harsh.

Topics: Contempt of Court | 1 Comment »

One Response to “Pannick time!”

  1. ross Says:
    June 1st, 2009 at 10:55 am


    I agree with you that the rules about talking to jurors in the UK are harsh. In the US, I think it is not uncommon for jurors to be intervewed.

    I note that in the case of Ian Huntley, who was convicted of double murder, the jury’s verdict was reached by an 11-1 majority. The judge told the jury when it retired that it had to return a unanimous verdict. But after days of deliberations, the judge said he would accept a majority verdict. Wouldn’t it be reasonable to assume that the juror who voted against a guilty verdict maintained their position from the start of deliberations? If so, the effect doesn’t seem a lot different from the other case you discussed.


You must be logged in to post a comment.