Jurors in Terrorism trial on 11 hour benders...

[faceless]

DISORDER IN COURT
By Adrian Shaw 04/05/2007

A JUROR in the £50million Bluewater bomb plot trial yesterday revealed how some of his colleagues went on 11-hour booze benders. Michael Symes said one jury member was so hung over the day after a marathon session that a whole day's hearing had to be called off. Mr Symes was one of 12 jurors who sat through the 13-month case, the longest ever terrorism trial. It took them 27 days to reach a verdict - another record. Tempers frayed and bitching broke out among the seven men and five women flung together for the seemingly never-ending hearing at the Old Bailey.

Computer programmer Mr Symes, 44, claimed that as well as the boozing, jurors took "sickies", went on holiday together and constantly turned up late. He said: "We would be stood down at 10.30 and some would go to the pub at 11am. One time we returned to court next day and I heard them say some of them had stayed in the pub until 10pm - that's 11 hours. Another time, we turned up and there were only 11 of us. One man was being examined by the matron and we were stood down for the day while they arranged a taxi.

"I asked another juror what the problem was. She said he was hung over which I thought was outrageous. She said, 'Have you never been hung over?' I said, 'Yes, of course I have but not on jury service'. Most of them regularly went to the pub, I didn't think it was appropriate. I felt they thought I was miserable but I wasn't there to make friends. They had barbecues and went on holiday, about four of them on a boat. I think there will be some good friendships out of it."

The jury eventually found Omar Khyam guilty of conspiring to cause explosions along with Anthony Garcia, Jawad Akbar, Waheed Mahmood and Salahuddin Amin. They were jailed for life by judge Sir Michael Astill over the plot whose targets included the Bluewater shopping centre in Kent.

Mr Symes, of Chessington, Surrey, said that during a three-week break, one juror offered the others a trip on his boat but did not ask Mr Symes - "He knew I'd say no." The jury split into factions. He added: "There was a lot of bitchiness. You would have certain people getting on well, or so you thought. Then one of them would leave the room and the others would say rude things. It was very two-faced. It was always the same people who were off sick, usually a Monday morning or a Friday afternoon. I thought it was selfish. I always tried to get there on time but the others had different priorities."

Last night, lawyer Mark Stephens said any boozing by the jury could not form the basis of an appeal against conviction. He added: "You cannot argue the verdicts of the jury were flawed and that is the acid test. When they were stood down from their deliberations, they were entitled to do what they want."

Two other jurors yesterday spoke out. Edward Manktelow, 25, said: "They started out treating us well. But as the months went on, we became part of the furniture." Audrey Young said: "We should have been treated like royalty considering the nature and duration of the trial."

----------------

I don't think this is a problem at all - but I wonder why these jurors allowed their names to be published? Surely if there was a genuine threat from Al-Qaeeda (or whoever) then that's a pretty risky thing to do?

This suggests to me that there isn't actually an organised threat as such - as I'm sure these details must have been given security clearance before being published.

[Marcella-FL]

I am rather surprised that the behavior was allowed through the courts ... I unerstand their time off is their time off but showing up late? It may not afect any appeals but it will give cause to file appeals and drag out the costs more for the public to pay.