https://www.theguardian.com/australi...campers-ntwnfb
A jury in the case of an airline captain accused of the double murder of Russell Hill and Carol Clay at a campsite in Victoria’s alpine region in 2020 has been discharged.

Greg Lynn, 57, has pleaded not guilty to two counts of murder and the prosecution and his lawyer were expected to open their cases on Friday.

But justice Michael Croucher said the 12 jurors and two substitutes empanelled in the case had been discharged.

Croucher told the jury that he was only giving them limited reasons for his decision, but that the law was filled with technicalities.

“I don’t want to embarrass anyone and it’s nobody’s fault,” he said.

“I’m sorry if that doesn’t give you much information, but that’s all I’m going to tell you.

“Thank you for putting your hands up for jury service, and for being willing to undertake this vital solemn and important role in the justice system, but it won’t be in this case.”

Lynn is represented by defence barrister Dermot Dann KC and Michael McGrath.

A new jury is set to be empanelled on Monday.

The trial was set to last for between four and six weeks.

Some of them are probably relieved as I imagine the evidence will be confronting for even the most stoic of individuals.

Part of the reason is that it was supposed to be last year but he changed lawyer just before and asked for a extension due to 'money issues'. Few legal people thinking hes purposely trying to delay the case

What an interesting day two.

Better get the AFAP involved

Jurors are supposed to be ordinary lay people. If you hold a degree or work in an associated Industry generally you won't be selected.

It's a random selection from the electoral role with some criteria to get a cross section of the community, that is so they don't get a jury with all the same background. Then there is opportunity to dismiss jurors if there could be prejudice/conflicts of interest etc... Never heard of a degree automatically disqualifying them, however if they worked in the same company or such that may be cause.

That's most assuredly not the case. Education is not a screening question, and the outline of the case you're going to hear isn't announced until after the jurors have been empanelled.

Thats true but its the defense counsel that gets to thumbs up or thumbs down those called up for jury duty on the day. They can only pick from those present but you can be reasonably certain that those whose demeanor suggests someone who is reasonably intelligent or educated won't be selected. When I was called up for jury duty for a Supreme Court case I asked the judge to be excused as my aviation medical was due and not completing it in time would affect my income. I did get to see the selection process and it seemed that the men chosen had the look and demeanor of a tradie.

The defence is only entitled to six peremptory challenges so trying to wean out a particular category of prospective juror based on looks alone in the 10 or so seconds that defence counsel has between them being called forward and them starting their oath or affirmation is a bit of a stretch.

So blokes earning two or three times as much as a QF subsidiary F/O? Four or five times if they're on CFMEU Queensland government construction sites. :rolleyes:

This used to be in the ANRs:Don't know whether an equivalent provision is now buried somewhere else in Commonwealth law or whether there's an equivalent exemption in any of the States' legislation.

So you dont think the defense counsel is not checking out the potential jurors in the 15-20 minutes of the Judges preamble prior to jury selection? If you go for a job interview you have won or lost the job in the first 30 seconds of being in the room. The selection panel will have formed an opinion that will be reinforced by your subsequent performance.

The RAAF. Qantas. Southern. Ansett. Qatar. Jetstar.

By any measure a pretty full dance card.

Haha. I only got my Qantas job because one of the interviewing Captains was a cricket tragic (like me). Pre-interview, he asked me if I happened to know the score in the Gabba test that was being played at the time and I was able to comply in detail! Tick.:ok:

In short, no.

In most courts the prospective jurors receive all the relevant pre-empanelment information from the Bailiff in a segregated area away from the courtroom, so there is no 15-20 minute period where the prospective jurors are in view of Defence counsel before empanelment begins.

When the prospective jurors are brought into the court they are usually at the back or to the Prosecution's side of the court room. The Defence really only gets a look at a selected juror when their juror number and name is called out after being drawn by the Judge's Associate, and they walk up to the Bailiff to be sworn in.

It's quite different from how it is sometimes portrayed in movies and the like.

My job interview days as a candidate are long gone now, but thanks for the tip.

Well I'm referring to my actual experience as a potential juror in the Victorian Supreme Court. What are you referring to?

I was in court for the second jury selection. It was court one. The biggest.

a very large pool was required to select 15.

I think about 60 or 70.

Lynn was very attentive and even before formal selection and questioning had begun Lynn started taking notes on the note pad before him.

he had been sitting still before they were all seated.

but as soon as they started to enter is when he began to take notes.

My recent experience as an empanelled juror on a Queensland Supreme Court trial.

So not Victoria where this trial is taking place. So when there is a murder trial in Queensland involving an ex-Jetstar pilot I will defer to your experience in the QSC regarding jury selection.