Extract from the Brisbane Times:
A woman hoping to be Australia’s first deaf juror has lost a legal bid in Queensland’s highest court.
Gaye Prudence Lyons, who can lip read but requires an Auslan interpreter to communicate, claimed she was discriminated against after being excluded from an Ipswich District Court jury in 2012.
It sparked a three-year legal battle that has been through numerous Queensland courts and tribunals, with Ms Lyons suing the state government in the Supreme Court of Appeal.
However in a verdict handed down on Friday, three appeal judges found that it was within the law for Ms Lyons to be left off the jury by a court registrar.
It comes after a similar case in Victoria, where a 34-year-old man was excluded from jury duty.
Earlier this year, Ms Lyons said her campaign to serve on the jury was “to break down barriers and have equal opportunities for the deaf community”.
The Limping Chicken is the UK’s deaf blogs and news website, and is the world’s most popular deaf blog.
Make sure you never miss a post by finding out how to follow us, and don’t forget to check out what our supporters provide:
- Phonak: innovative technology and products in hearing acoustics
- Ai-Live: Live captions and transcripts
- Bellman: hearing loss solutions
- Deaf Umbrella: sign language interpreting and communications support
- Clarion: BSL/English interpreting and employment services
- Appa: Communication services for Deaf, Deafblind and hard of hearing people
- SignVideo: Instant BSL video interpreting online
- 121 Captions: captioning and speech-to-text services
- Doncaster School for the Deaf: education for Deaf children
- Signworld: online BSL learning and teaching materials
- deafPLUS: Money advice line in BSL
- Hamilton Lodge School in Brighton: education for Deaf children
- Lipspeaker UK: specialist lipspeaking support
- RAD: financial advice for Deaf people
- Krazy Kat: visual theatre with BSL
- Enable Support Services: Supporting Deaf children and adults in Suffolk, Essex, Cambridgeshire and Norfolk
- Exeter Deaf Academy: education for Deaf children
- SignHealth: healthcare charity for Deaf people
- CJ Interpreting: communication support in BSL
- Sign Solutions:, language and learning
- Sign Lingual: BSL interpreting and communication services
- Action Deafness Communications: sign language and Red Dot online video interpreting
- SDHH: Project Development and Consultancy
- Mykasoft: Deaf-run Web Design Studio
Tim
September 1, 2015
Then Australia has no moral right to prosecute Deaf people, if Deaf people do not qualify as jury peers.
vanizorc
September 1, 2015
More details are needed in this article — by what specific argument did the courts proffer to “justify” this woman’s exclusion? As I’m aware, the ability to hear would not be a “bonafide occupational requirement” for jury duty. However, the accessibility technology that the woman may need *might* compromise confidential of some sort — I don’t know how this can be, so I’ll be searching for more details on this case. If there is no such loss of “safety/confidentiality” from including a deaf person on the jury, then she was most definitely discriminated against and should appeal again.
Cathy
September 1, 2015
It is a shame there are not more details on this case; from which one can determine what has really happened and why this woman was left off the jury?
Personally, I do not agree with deaf people serving on juries. Some cases are so complex even an interpreter may not be fully understood. If a deaf person is not fully understanding proceedings then they can hardly partake of a jury, can they? That would jeopardise a trial and constitute a miscarriage of justice.
Whose to bet that this is what the judges were worried about?!