Police Officers and CPS Solicitors Serving on Juries: The Appearance of Bias
| Author | Neil MacEwan |
| Published date | 01 August 2008 |
| Date | 01 August 2008 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1350/jcla.2008.72.4.283 |
| Subject Matter | House of Lords |
House of Lords
Police Officers and CPS Solicitors Serving on Juries: The
Appearance of Bias
R vAbdroikof; R vGreen; R v Williamson [2007] UKHL 37
Keywords Unconscious and apparent bias; Jurors; Impartiality of jury;
Right to fair trial; Juries including police officers and CPS solicitors
This House of Lords judgment dealt with three separate appeals, heard
together on the same day (17 October 2007). Previously, in the Court of
Appeal, the cases had been joined in the same way. The three appellants
had each been tried on indictment, but in different courts and on
unrelated charges. In each of the first two cases (R v Abdroikof and R v
Green), the trial jury had as one of its members a serving police officer. In
the third case, a solicitor employed by the Crown Prosecution Service
was one of the jurors.
The three conjoined appeals raised the same question: whether a fair-
minded and informed observer would conclude, on the facts of each
case, that there was a real possibility that the trial jury was biased. The
Court of Appeal had answered this question in the negative ([2005] 1
WLR 3538). The appellants now sought the opinion of the House of
Lords. Baroness Hale was quick to point out that ‘like many simple
questions, it is by no means easy to answer’ ([2007] UKHL 37 at [45]).
At trial in the Central Criminal Court, the first appellant, Nurlon
Abroikof, had pleaded guilty to two counts of theft and defended un-
successfully a charge of attempted murder. There was a minor issue
concerning one aspect of the evidence of a police witness. When the jury
retired to consider their verdict, the foreman of the jury sent a note to
the judge, revealing that he was a serving police officer and expressing
some concern; namely, that he could be called up for police duty at the
Notting Hill Carnival on the following Bank Holiday Monday, when
the court was not sitting, and that he might there meet one or more
of the police officers who had been called to give evidence at the trial.
With the acquiescence of defending counsel, this juror was directed not
to report for police duty on the Monday.
The second appellant, Richard Green, had been stopped and searched
by police officers. During the course of the search, a police officer,
Sergeant Burgess, placed his hand into the appellant’s pocket and
pricked his finger on a used syringe. Green was charged with the
offences of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and having a bladed
or pointed article. He pleaded not guilty to both charges. There was a
dispute on the evidence between him and the police sergeant concern-
ing the manner in which he was searched, and what he and the sergeant
respectively said. He was convicted by a jury sitting at Woolwich Crown
Court. Some time after the trial, by chance, the appellant’s solicitor
discovered that a police officer, PC Mason, had been a member of that
283The Journal of Criminal Law (2008) 72 JCL 283–287
doi:1350/jcla.2008.72.4.507
To continue reading
Request your trial