OBSTINATE JUROR

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21492, 16 May 1933, Page 16

OBSTINATE JUROR

" WOODEN-HEADED MAN "

NEW TRIAL NECESSARY

Declaring that the disagreement illustrated the need for majority verdicts, Judge Woinarski made trenchant comments in a Melbourne Court lately, when he was told that a jury was unable to agree because of the determination of one juryman not to conform to the view of his colleagues. The case was one in which a youth was charged with assault. When the jury had deliberated for the full statutory period of six hours, Judge Woinarski recalled the jurors and asked whether there was any possibility ol agreement upon a verdict. . The Foreman: No, Your Honor. It is the same old tale; one man is wooden-^ headed. , Judge Woinarski: I hope that he is onlv wooden-headed, but I am inclined to think that it is more than obstinacy. I hope that the juryman, whoever he is will remember his oath to record a verdict according to the evidence. It is not fair to the other members of the jury, who have been made to sutler. Apparently most of you agreed very soon. One man has held you up, and do not think that it has been done honestly. It means that all this expense has been incurred needlessly, and the prisoner and his people will have to be nut to more pain, trouble and anxiety. Jhe Crown has wasted your time and its money all because of the obstinacy ol one man, who will not discuss the case honestly. It shows how great is the need for ma'iority verdicts. / The Foreman: That is true. Probably the man should never have been there. He would not listen to argument. Judge Woinarski: The case seems to be one"of which there could be only one view. Certainly, it might be one wav or the other, but it is not a case in which there could have been an honest dilter■fence of opinion. The jury was discharged, and the accused was remanded for another trial.