陪审团在2017年英国第四频道系列剧《审判：家庭谋杀案》中审理了一起虚构案件。
The jury hears a fictional case in the 2017 Channel 4 series The Trial: A Murder in the Family.
照片：Joss Barratt/Channel 4 来信 为什么在欺诈案件中计划进行法官独审审判是错误的 Nic Madge David Lindsay 对政府改革刑事司法体系的提议作出回应 政府正确地放弃了David Lammy的主要提议，即用独自审理的法官取代一些陪审团审判（政府因公众强烈反对而放弃削减英格兰和威尔士陪审团审判的计划，10月4日）。
Photograph: Joss Barratt/Channel 4 Letters Why plan for judge-only trials in fraud cases is wrong Nic Madge David Lindsay respond to the government’s proposals to reform the criminal justice system The government is right to abandon David Lammy’s main proposal to replace some jury trials with judges sitting alone ( Ministers drop plans to cut jury trials in England and Wales after outcry, 4 October ).
还有其他方法可以减少刑事案件积压的严重问题并保护受害者。然而，政府在某些欺诈案件中推行法官独审审判的计划是错误的。作为巡回法官，我曾主持过有陪审团参与的欺诈案件审理，包括一起价值4800万英镑的庞氏骗局和一起涉及超过40000份文件的俄罗斯身份欺诈案。陪审团在这两起案件中表现出色，做出了合理理性的裁决——在这两起案件中，被告在某些指控上被判有罪，在其他指控上被判无罪。
There are other ways to reduce the appalling backlog of criminal cases and to protect victims. However, the government is wrong to proceed with its plan for judge-only trials in some fraud cases. As a circuit judge, I presided over fraud trials with juries, including a Ponzi fraud worth £48m and a Russian identity fraud with more than 40,000 documents. The juries were totally on top of both trials and delivered sensible, rational verdicts – in both cases guilty on some charges and not guilty on others.
我的经验是，欺诈案件中的关键问题往往是被告是否具有欺骗性意图。这不是一个技术性问题。陪审团相比法官更能够恰当地判断这一点。圣奥尔本斯
My experience is that the key issue in fraud cases is frequently whether the defendant acted dishonestly. That is not a technical question. It is something that juries are much better able to decide than judges. St Albans