I never knew this, but according to tonight's One News, if you're serving on a jury, the accused has access to your name, occupation, and address; and until 2008, the accused was allowed to take that list away with them (though not anymore; they're only allowed to look at it under supervision now). This was exposed when accused George Baker wrote a letter to a juror who it looks like he fancied.
I have to ask - why? Why aren't the names, addresses, and occupations or jurors kept totally away from accused? Isn't there a fear that if a felon gets sent down, or punished in some other way that he may retaliate at some later stage? Is this how it works overseas?
There is a severe shortage of common-sense in this country...
It's alleged Baker contacted a woman juror after getting her details from jurors' list, exposing a loophole in the system.
Under the law, the accused can view a list of jurors' names. People representing themselves get to see the list in more detail. Halfway through the trial the juror contacted police after a letter signed by Baker was sent to her home. [...] ONE News understands the letter wasn't intimidating, but in it Baker introduces himself and makes romantic overtures to the married, middle-aged woman
I have to ask - why? Why aren't the names, addresses, and occupations or jurors kept totally away from accused? Isn't there a fear that if a felon gets sent down, or punished in some other way that he may retaliate at some later stage? Is this how it works overseas?
There is a severe shortage of common-sense in this country...