THE JURY’S DUTY

Hokitika Guardian, 3 November 1932, Page 7

THE JURY’S DUTY

TO PROTECT INNOCENT PERSONS

WELLINGTON, Nov. 1

The circumstances under wliich it is competent for a. jury to find an accused person guilty 'of a charge hud against him were indicated plainly by the Chief Justice in summing up at a trial in the Supreme Court to-day.

It would be an intolerable istain on the escutcheon of the administration of British justice, said his Honor, that an innocent person should be convicted. Of course, there was always the possibility, however remote, of such a thing happening. Such a thing might happened upon perjured evidence, which the Court and the jury, but, fortunately, such things were rare in the annals of the administration of justice in this country. Not only was it important in the highest degree that an innocent person should not be convicted against whom the Crown had failed to prove its case to the satisfaction of the jury—because that amounted to practically the same thing —but it would never do for juries to say they had a .strong suspicion, and that they believed the accused might be guilty. What juries should be able to say before they convicted was: “‘We are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt upon the evidence brought before us that the accused is guilty of the offence charged against him.”