Absolutely. It’s especially bad that they attributed this to “same-race leniency” when their own data demonstrates that this is a highly asymmetric pattern.
Indeed! It's a fascinating report. From page 189 "The highest conviction rates among White jurors were in cases where the victim was Black and the defendant was either White or Asian. This suggests that White jurors who serve on racially mixed juries in a highly diverse community such as central London may be particularly sensitive to the plight of a Black victim of crime, so long as the perpetrator is also not Black."
I imagine a typical central London jury is full of middle class whites who see themselves as particularly antiracist.
The worst thing is that report concludes that while there is this same race leniency for non-white jurors, it doesn't affect the outcome because there are white people on the jury too and it's a majority vote. Good thing we're not still in the midst of massive demographic change then.
It’s also just another consequence of mass migration which literally no-one predicted. If anyone in 1968 had said that a consequence of our immigration policies would be racially biased juries in the 21st century they’d have been denounced as the worst type of fearmonger.
Thank you for a thought provoking, if somewhat depressing, article. I think that Millenial Woes is correct that Powell was reasonably explicit in voicing his fears and predictions as to what ethnic mass migration would bring but he suffered a level of suppression and opprobrium an order of magnitude beyond Denning. He was also a man still in his prime whose promising career was ended at that moment whereas Denning's illustrious career was reasonably coming to an end at the age of 83 (although he died a centenarian).
It is also not unreasonable to think that Powell would have been aware of this risk when he spoke out, yet still did. This might make him less politically astute than his contemporaries and those since but it also makes him a braver and more honest Englishman
To think we are a quarter of the way into the next century and this mass ethnic migration has only accelerated to where at least a quarter of the population is BAME and there is no reduction in sight.
Sadly, jury nullification is probably fairly well down the list of the miseries we can quite reasonably ascribe to this phenomenon but generally speaking it's hard to imagine its had anything but negative effects on pretty much any pre-existing institution, cultural more, or social norm.
Powell requires an entire post all to himself, but I don't disagree at all. I think that one of the problems with Powell's predictions was that he often presented such an apocalyptic outlook ('civil strife of such appalling dimensions that can only accurately be described as civil war', for instance), that anything less than that can be used to argue that his fears were exaggerated. The process of mass migration has produced a whole range of specific patterns which differ based on different ethnic / religious groups (knife crime, blasphemy laws, honour killings, self-policing communities etc) which would have required Nostradamus to foresee accurately.
His fundamental point was that attachment is psychological, and there is a limit to how much any society can be demographically altered whilst still retaining that psychological unity. I use his helpful phrase "the self-identification of each part with the whole" in an earlier post: democracy without a demos: https://davidgcoates.substack.com/p/democracy-without-a-demos
Thanks for the article. Despite studying law and now practicing as a solicitor I had forgotten about some of the Denning controversies in his later career. Some rambling thoughts with no particular agenda:
- the example Denning cites back in the 80s is an interesting one, because I suspect the black Bristol jury members would have been largely of Afro-Caribbean descent, and well integrated by most people’s standards (English born/speaking, at least nominally Christian etc), but still decided to return an incorrect verdict due to racial biases/perceived injustices in the system. An interesting question is why they perhaps felt that way, and what the experiences of their community were to date which led this. The answer is probably more complex than Denning’s initial observations;
- though the statistics cited are very interesting (though a little out of date) and do indicate the potential for bias, I suspect there are also many other points of prejudice which may also influence a juror’s decision which aren’t based on race and are probably more common;
- we still obviously get incorrect jury decisions from white juries. I might be wrong but I’m pretty sure the Colston Four riots verdict was delivered by a largely white jury. Which perhaps raises bigger questions around how different moral and cultural values now permeate our public discourse, which aren’t particularly linked with mass migration.
I think the point you raise about beefing up the requirements for doing jury service is a good idea. But personally I’m not sure if the mass migration problem is one which has (yet) caused problems re incorrect jury verdicts.
Thank you for the thoughtful response. On the specific points you raise:
- I agree that the specifics of the case are likely more complex. The nature of jury trial makes it difficult to properly analyse the extent to which these and other dynamics operate in specific cases. As I mention in the post, Denning's downfall was precisely because he speculated on the motive's of people he did not know. That being said I think your wider point ('why did they feel that way?' - 'what had been their experiences prior?' etc) reinforces one I was trying to make. Whenever there is an alleged lack of confidence from a minority group toward our institutions (in this case the legal system) the default assumption appears to be that these are legitimate grievances. Of course they might be; but equally might not. This is the point I made about an increasingly diverse community being one in which the legal system itself is assumed to be in the dock. The point in the 2007 study about South Asians lacking confidence in the system unless other South Asians are involved - even when no bias is present - reinforces this. I think it's probably an inevitable result of diversity / separate communities. An extreme example is the confessional-political system in Lebanon where every community has to be represented at all times.
- I agree with this to an extent; certainly other biases exist which might be prevalent. Unfortunately we simply don't know this, and other factors (class for instance, or sex) are not so explosive or politically salient. However it would certainly be useful for the MOJ to commission further reports on these other topics. The statistics are slightly dated because further research hasn't been done. I was actually struck by the opposite fact - that this information has seemingly been 'known' for two decades but I've never heard it discussed.
- Yes, absolutely. Although the striking thing in this study is the significant difference on BME juror conviction rates, there was a further study in 2010 ('Are Juries Fair?') which looked specifically at all-white juries. This found that all-white juries were consistently more likely to convict white defendants than BME defendants, especially when the victim was BME. The likelihood of this increased in more racially diverse areas (contrast was between Winchester and Nottingham). In Nottingham white jurors provided a 61% conviction rate for the white defendant when the victim was BME; but only a 4% conviction rate when the victim was white. These were otherwise identical cases: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-institute/files/are_juries_fair.pdf
This demonstrates that this is not a question of 'white juries reliable / non-white unreliable' but that the politics of race affects all communities and has become a salient factor in a system (trial by jury) which most requires objectivity. Clearly 100% objectivity can never be achieved, but part of my thesis is that mass migration and the foregrounding of racial politics has made us a more divided society than would otherwise have been the case.
- I'm thinking about writing up something on jury qualification at some stage, looking at the Morris report, the introduction of majority voting (I mentioned this in an earlier Substack: Liberal Authoritarianism: https://davidgcoates.substack.com/p/liberal-authoritarianism), and the abolition of property qualifications. The system certainly needed reform in the 60s and 70s, but the specific reforms imposed were unwise.
Thanks David, appreciate the pertinent comments on racial politics and the additional stats, which I wasn’t aware of. Will look out for your future articles.
The Colston Four judgements were linked to immigration - via the strange impulse amongst some whites to excuse any and all bad behaviour or crime if it is committed by or for blacks.
Hi Michael. Absolutely, I mentioned this in an earlier reply, but the striking thing in the 2007 study is the significant difference on BME juror conviction rates, there was a further study in 2010 ('Are Juries Fair?') which looked specifically at all-white juries. This found that all-white juries were consistently more likely to convict white defendants than BME defendants, especially when the victim was BME. The likelihood of this increased in more racially diverse areas (contrast was between Winchester and Nottingham). In Nottingham white jurors provided a 61% conviction rate for the white defendant when the victim was BME; but only a 4% conviction rate when the victim was white. These were otherwise identical cases: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-institute/files/are_juries_fair.pdf
This demonstrates that this is not a question of 'white juries reliable / non-white unreliable' but that the politics of race affects all communities and has become a salient factor in a system (trial by jury) which most requires objectivity. Clearly 100% objectivity can never be achieved, but part of my thesis is that mass migration and the foregrounding of racial politics has made us a more divided society than would otherwise have been the case.
The Colston Four trial is a great example of this.
'I don’t remember anyone making the case to the British people that we ought to engage in mass immigration'
In Munich last month J.D.Vance said:
'No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants.'
Almost all my adult life this policy of open borders has been foisted upon me by politicians and my monarch who never gave me a chance to vote against it because they believed I had no right to oppose something which they had decided was "good" and "right".
So far as I personally am concerned my government has behaved traitorously toward me, and I have lost all confidence in it. I don't mean the current shower, I mean the institution.
Can you please clarify? Are the figures you quote in your fifth paragraph, which are astonishing if accurate, from simulated trials with actors playing lawyers and defendants??? If so, how many such trials were there i.e. what was the sample size?
The nature of juries makes it impossible (and illegal) to conduct proper analysis of genuine cases; so this is the best we have.
There was a further study in 2010 ('Are Juries Fair?') which looked specifically at all-white juries. This found that all-white juries were consistently more likely to convict white defendants than BME defendants, especially when the victim was BME. The likelihood of this increased in more racially diverse areas (contrast was between Winchester and Nottingham). In Nottingham white jurors provided a 61% conviction rate for the white defendant when the victim was BME; but only a 4% conviction rate when the victim was white. These were otherwise identical cases: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-institute/files/are_juries_fair.pdf
That MoJ report is amazing. Crazy this has been known officially for nearly 20 years.
Absolutely. It’s especially bad that they attributed this to “same-race leniency” when their own data demonstrates that this is a highly asymmetric pattern.
Indeed! It's a fascinating report. From page 189 "The highest conviction rates among White jurors were in cases where the victim was Black and the defendant was either White or Asian. This suggests that White jurors who serve on racially mixed juries in a highly diverse community such as central London may be particularly sensitive to the plight of a Black victim of crime, so long as the perpetrator is also not Black."
I imagine a typical central London jury is full of middle class whites who see themselves as particularly antiracist.
The worst thing is that report concludes that while there is this same race leniency for non-white jurors, it doesn't affect the outcome because there are white people on the jury too and it's a majority vote. Good thing we're not still in the midst of massive demographic change then.
It’s also just another consequence of mass migration which literally no-one predicted. If anyone in 1968 had said that a consequence of our immigration policies would be racially biased juries in the 21st century they’d have been denounced as the worst type of fearmonger.
Powell in 1968 kind of did, with his infamous comment about "the whip hand".
Thank you for a thought provoking, if somewhat depressing, article. I think that Millenial Woes is correct that Powell was reasonably explicit in voicing his fears and predictions as to what ethnic mass migration would bring but he suffered a level of suppression and opprobrium an order of magnitude beyond Denning. He was also a man still in his prime whose promising career was ended at that moment whereas Denning's illustrious career was reasonably coming to an end at the age of 83 (although he died a centenarian).
It is also not unreasonable to think that Powell would have been aware of this risk when he spoke out, yet still did. This might make him less politically astute than his contemporaries and those since but it also makes him a braver and more honest Englishman
To think we are a quarter of the way into the next century and this mass ethnic migration has only accelerated to where at least a quarter of the population is BAME and there is no reduction in sight.
Sadly, jury nullification is probably fairly well down the list of the miseries we can quite reasonably ascribe to this phenomenon but generally speaking it's hard to imagine its had anything but negative effects on pretty much any pre-existing institution, cultural more, or social norm.
Powell requires an entire post all to himself, but I don't disagree at all. I think that one of the problems with Powell's predictions was that he often presented such an apocalyptic outlook ('civil strife of such appalling dimensions that can only accurately be described as civil war', for instance), that anything less than that can be used to argue that his fears were exaggerated. The process of mass migration has produced a whole range of specific patterns which differ based on different ethnic / religious groups (knife crime, blasphemy laws, honour killings, self-policing communities etc) which would have required Nostradamus to foresee accurately.
His fundamental point was that attachment is psychological, and there is a limit to how much any society can be demographically altered whilst still retaining that psychological unity. I use his helpful phrase "the self-identification of each part with the whole" in an earlier post: democracy without a demos: https://davidgcoates.substack.com/p/democracy-without-a-demos
Thanks for the article. Despite studying law and now practicing as a solicitor I had forgotten about some of the Denning controversies in his later career. Some rambling thoughts with no particular agenda:
- the example Denning cites back in the 80s is an interesting one, because I suspect the black Bristol jury members would have been largely of Afro-Caribbean descent, and well integrated by most people’s standards (English born/speaking, at least nominally Christian etc), but still decided to return an incorrect verdict due to racial biases/perceived injustices in the system. An interesting question is why they perhaps felt that way, and what the experiences of their community were to date which led this. The answer is probably more complex than Denning’s initial observations;
- though the statistics cited are very interesting (though a little out of date) and do indicate the potential for bias, I suspect there are also many other points of prejudice which may also influence a juror’s decision which aren’t based on race and are probably more common;
- we still obviously get incorrect jury decisions from white juries. I might be wrong but I’m pretty sure the Colston Four riots verdict was delivered by a largely white jury. Which perhaps raises bigger questions around how different moral and cultural values now permeate our public discourse, which aren’t particularly linked with mass migration.
I think the point you raise about beefing up the requirements for doing jury service is a good idea. But personally I’m not sure if the mass migration problem is one which has (yet) caused problems re incorrect jury verdicts.
Thank you for the thoughtful response. On the specific points you raise:
- I agree that the specifics of the case are likely more complex. The nature of jury trial makes it difficult to properly analyse the extent to which these and other dynamics operate in specific cases. As I mention in the post, Denning's downfall was precisely because he speculated on the motive's of people he did not know. That being said I think your wider point ('why did they feel that way?' - 'what had been their experiences prior?' etc) reinforces one I was trying to make. Whenever there is an alleged lack of confidence from a minority group toward our institutions (in this case the legal system) the default assumption appears to be that these are legitimate grievances. Of course they might be; but equally might not. This is the point I made about an increasingly diverse community being one in which the legal system itself is assumed to be in the dock. The point in the 2007 study about South Asians lacking confidence in the system unless other South Asians are involved - even when no bias is present - reinforces this. I think it's probably an inevitable result of diversity / separate communities. An extreme example is the confessional-political system in Lebanon where every community has to be represented at all times.
- I agree with this to an extent; certainly other biases exist which might be prevalent. Unfortunately we simply don't know this, and other factors (class for instance, or sex) are not so explosive or politically salient. However it would certainly be useful for the MOJ to commission further reports on these other topics. The statistics are slightly dated because further research hasn't been done. I was actually struck by the opposite fact - that this information has seemingly been 'known' for two decades but I've never heard it discussed.
- Yes, absolutely. Although the striking thing in this study is the significant difference on BME juror conviction rates, there was a further study in 2010 ('Are Juries Fair?') which looked specifically at all-white juries. This found that all-white juries were consistently more likely to convict white defendants than BME defendants, especially when the victim was BME. The likelihood of this increased in more racially diverse areas (contrast was between Winchester and Nottingham). In Nottingham white jurors provided a 61% conviction rate for the white defendant when the victim was BME; but only a 4% conviction rate when the victim was white. These were otherwise identical cases: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-institute/files/are_juries_fair.pdf
This demonstrates that this is not a question of 'white juries reliable / non-white unreliable' but that the politics of race affects all communities and has become a salient factor in a system (trial by jury) which most requires objectivity. Clearly 100% objectivity can never be achieved, but part of my thesis is that mass migration and the foregrounding of racial politics has made us a more divided society than would otherwise have been the case.
- I'm thinking about writing up something on jury qualification at some stage, looking at the Morris report, the introduction of majority voting (I mentioned this in an earlier Substack: Liberal Authoritarianism: https://davidgcoates.substack.com/p/liberal-authoritarianism), and the abolition of property qualifications. The system certainly needed reform in the 60s and 70s, but the specific reforms imposed were unwise.
Thanks again for your thoughtful response.
Thanks David, appreciate the pertinent comments on racial politics and the additional stats, which I wasn’t aware of. Will look out for your future articles.
Nice talking to you - hope to see you again! Really appreciate your insight.
The Colston Four judgements were linked to immigration - via the strange impulse amongst some whites to excuse any and all bad behaviour or crime if it is committed by or for blacks.
Hi Michael. Absolutely, I mentioned this in an earlier reply, but the striking thing in the 2007 study is the significant difference on BME juror conviction rates, there was a further study in 2010 ('Are Juries Fair?') which looked specifically at all-white juries. This found that all-white juries were consistently more likely to convict white defendants than BME defendants, especially when the victim was BME. The likelihood of this increased in more racially diverse areas (contrast was between Winchester and Nottingham). In Nottingham white jurors provided a 61% conviction rate for the white defendant when the victim was BME; but only a 4% conviction rate when the victim was white. These were otherwise identical cases: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-institute/files/are_juries_fair.pdf
This demonstrates that this is not a question of 'white juries reliable / non-white unreliable' but that the politics of race affects all communities and has become a salient factor in a system (trial by jury) which most requires objectivity. Clearly 100% objectivity can never be achieved, but part of my thesis is that mass migration and the foregrounding of racial politics has made us a more divided society than would otherwise have been the case.
The Colston Four trial is a great example of this.
This is a key point:
'I don’t remember anyone making the case to the British people that we ought to engage in mass immigration'
In Munich last month J.D.Vance said:
'No voter on this continent went to the ballot box to open the floodgates to millions of unvetted immigrants.'
Almost all my adult life this policy of open borders has been foisted upon me by politicians and my monarch who never gave me a chance to vote against it because they believed I had no right to oppose something which they had decided was "good" and "right".
So far as I personally am concerned my government has behaved traitorously toward me, and I have lost all confidence in it. I don't mean the current shower, I mean the institution.
Can you please clarify? Are the figures you quote in your fifth paragraph, which are astonishing if accurate, from simulated trials with actors playing lawyers and defendants??? If so, how many such trials were there i.e. what was the sample size?
Yes, the MOJ ran a series of mock trials with juries, in which all elements remained the same except the ethnicity of the defendants and the jurors. The methodology is contained on p.57 of the following report (https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-institute/files/diversity-fairness-in-the-jury-system.pdf) - with the specific data points I'm referencing starting on p.164. The sample size was 319 jurors over 27 juries.
The nature of juries makes it impossible (and illegal) to conduct proper analysis of genuine cases; so this is the best we have.
There was a further study in 2010 ('Are Juries Fair?') which looked specifically at all-white juries. This found that all-white juries were consistently more likely to convict white defendants than BME defendants, especially when the victim was BME. The likelihood of this increased in more racially diverse areas (contrast was between Winchester and Nottingham). In Nottingham white jurors provided a 61% conviction rate for the white defendant when the victim was BME; but only a 4% conviction rate when the victim was white. These were otherwise identical cases: https://www.ucl.ac.uk/judicial-institute/sites/judicial-institute/files/are_juries_fair.pdf