Jury Summons

Gilbert2

SarEl wrote: »

Which only demonstrates that you have only read your passport. The British are citizens of their country, which is why citizenship is such a big deal to some people and why there are citizenship processes and ceremonies for people attaining citizenship. You can be a British subject and still not be a Brtish citizen - many people around the world are! Being a British subject provides you with certain "protections" under the Crown - most of which are pretty meaningless unless the "Crown" decides to protect you! Until the 1980's, when something happend to change their minds, the Falkland Islanders were not British citizens and had restricted rights to enter the UK. The UK Border agency seems to realise there is a difference: http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/britishcitizenship/othernationality/britishsubjects/

Perhaps they are wrong?

British subjects alive and well, and are not automatically entitled to citizenship, which is an entirely different thing.

Your link simply appears to confirm what I posted.

There is a clear distinction between citizens and subjects in Britain.

To be born British is to be born a subject, not a citizen.

Members of the commonwealth, or those wishing to become British, as you describe above, are or can be British citizens.

But being British born makes one nothing other than a subject, not a citizen.

Gilbert2

Daedalus wrote: »

One is both and they are not mutually exclusive.

Not quite, see above post.

RichardD1970

Daedalus wrote: »

The jury decide questions of fact, which isn't quite the same as determining guilt.

Then why does the Judge ask if the jury find the defendant innocent or guilty?

SarEl

Gilbert2 wrote: »

To be born British is to be born a subject, not a citizen.

The British Nationality Act 1981 defines someone who is born in the United Kinddom or qualifying territoties as having British citizenship. Presumably the law is confused on this point too?

anxious_mum

In my experience, the judge asks if they think the 'defendant' is guilty or not because he is defending his right. He has proclaimed himself guilty, or he wouldn't be there. Why is a citizen and a defendant being discussed in the same topic?

anxious_mum

And, as far as the point of law is concerned, the jury will ONLY decide guilty or not. It is the up to the judge to decide the sentence that the perpetrator will serve, usually based on precedence.

anxious_mum

I've just done a google...i think we're subjects, I always thought that :-)

SarEl

anxious_mum wrote: »

In my experience, the judge asks if they think the 'defendant' is guilty or not because he is defending his right. He has proclaimed himself guilty, or he wouldn't be there. Why is a citizen and a defendant being discussed in the same topic?

I beg your pardon? You think that defendants have proclaimed themselves guilty by virtue of the fact that they are in court? I think you will find that the presumption and basis in British law is that defendants are innocent until proven guilty.

Nobody was discussing defendants at all - they were discussing jury service! Try reading the thread for the subject matter under discussion.

anxious_mum wrote: »

And, as far as the point of law is concerned, the jury will ONLY decide guilty or not. It is the up to the judge to decide the sentence that the perpetrator will serve, usually based on precedence.

No. The judge uses sentencing tariffs to decide the sentence, which are scales of terms /punishments appropriate to sets of crimes. Tariffs provide a range of available punishments which are then fixed in individual cases based on prior convictions and the specific seriousness / circumstances of the crime. Precedents have nothing to do with sentencing.

anxious_mum wrote: »

I've just done a google...i think we're subjects, I always thought that :-)

Luckily, what you have always thought does not determine what the law says. Nor does google.

"There are currently six classes of British national:[1]

British citizensBritish Citizens usually hold this status through a connection with the United Kingdom, Channel Islands and Isle of Man ("United Kingdom and Islands"). Former Citizens of the United Kingdom and Colonies (CUKCs) who possessed right of abode under the Immigration Act 1971 through a connection with the United Kingdom and Islands generally became British citizens on 1 January 1983.British citizenship is the most common type of British nationality, and the only one that automatically carries a right of abode in the United Kingdom.However, other rights can vary according to how the British citizenship was acquired. In particular there are restrictions for 'British citizens by descent' transmitting British citizenship to their children born outside the UK. These restrictions do not apply to 'British citizens other than by descent'.

British Overseas Territories citizens (formerly British Dependent Territories citizenship) (BOTC)BOTC (formerly BDTC) is the form of British nationality held by connection with an existing overseas territory. Nearly all are now also British citizens as a result of the British Overseas Territories Act 2002. It is possible to hold BOTC and British citizenship simultaneously.

British Overseas citizens (BOC)BOCs are those former CUKCs who did not qualify for either British citizenship or British Dependent Territories citizenship. Most of these derived their status as CUKCs from former colonies, such as Malaysia and Kenya, because of various quirks and exceptions in the law that resulted in them retaining CUKC status in spite of the independence of their colonies. Note that this is fairly uncommon: most CUKCs (including those from Malaysia and Kenya) lost their CUKC status upon independence.

British subjects British subjects (as defined in the 1981 Act) are those British subjects who were not CUKCs or citizens of any other Commonwealth country. Most of these derived their status as British subjects from British India or the Republic of Ireland as they existed before 1949.

British Nationals (Overseas) (BNO)The status of BNO did not originally exist under the 1981 scheme, but was created by the Hong Kong Act 1985 and the British Nationality (Hong Kong) Order 1986. BNOs are those former Hong Kong BDTCs who applied for the status of BNO before the handover of Hong Kong to the People's Republic of China. Hong Kong BDTCs who did not apply to become BNOs, and who did not gain PRC nationality after the handover, became BOCs if they did not have any other nationality.

British protected persons (BPP)BPPs derive from parts of the British Empire that were protectorates or protected states with nominally independent rulers under the "protection" of the British Crown – and not officially part of the Crown's dominions. The status of BPP is sui generis – BPPs are not Commonwealth citizens (British subjects, in the old sense) and were not traditionally considered British nationals, but are not aliens either."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_nationality_law#British_citizenship_by_birth_in_the_United_Kingdom

JackieRHE

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Then why does the Judge ask if the jury find the defendant innocent or guilty?

Not quite - the jury is asked if they find the defendant guilty or not guilty on each count before them.

The defendant would have entered a "not guilty" plea to each of those counts. There is no need for a trial when the defendant enters a guilty plea (except on occasions a trial of issue which is not a jury trial anyway).

The judge in summing up will direct the jury on the law that applies in the case and the jury find on the evidence.

There should be no presumption of guilt "because he wouldn't be there otherwise".

Even as a prosecutor I have seen cases where the evidence that the witnesses gave in court was very different from their original statements. Sometimes this is just due to the way different questions are phrased, or different recollections of detail, but sometimes the whole case looks very different when the witness gives their evidence.

This is why it is tested in court.

You have a responsibility to attend. Take a book, hope you get selected and learn something about the way the legal system works.