Chloe Norton: How I won the right to be accepted for jury duty

In 2017 I received a large, important looking, envelope. Inside was a summons for Jury Duty. I was extremely excited, I had always wanted to take part in jury duty – I had grown up watching CSI, Castle, Bones, NCIS… you name it!

So the idea of sitting in a court room deciding the fate of a potential criminal was fascinating to me. I filled out the necessary forms and sent them back.

One of the sections asked if I needed any additional requirements and I stated that I would need a sign language interpreter.

A few weeks later I received another important looking letter. Expecting to see a court date, I was shocked to read that I had been rejected because I requested an interpreter for the proceedings!

I found the letter quite rude and demeaning as it outlined that I did not have ‘capacity’ to serve as a juror… and they hadn’t even met me!

They had assumed that because I need an interpreter that I would be unable to follow the court proceedings and make critical decisions.

I was extremely offended by this, and for the first time in a really long time, I actually felt ashamed to be deaf…

After a few days of mulling the issue over, I decided to email the Jury Central Summoning Bureau. 

I did a bit of research on the topic before composing the email and found that there have been some cases in the US and Australia where deaf people are able to serve as a jury with a fully qualified court interpreter present.

I brought this up and stated that the UK should do the same. I argued that interpreters are highly educated people that have been trained to be precise and neutral.

From the start of their training, they are reminded time and time again that confidentiality is integral to their role. Therefore interpreters will not enter the jury room with the intention to interfere with the discussion and to leave the courtroom and tell others about the case.  

Interpreters are ‘viewed’ as a piece of equipment, equal to a pair of glasses, or a wheelchair (if you know what I mean!). There is no difference between an interpreter and a walking stick, except for a beating heart.

In situations such as courtroom proceedings, a Level 6 interpreter is used, which ensures the deaf person gains full understanding of the words spoken and emotions displayed by the person speaking, not the interpreter themselves.

Therefore, if a deaf person is excluded from jury duty because of their inability to carry out jury duty without an interpreter, surely persons who require any sort of aid to carry out their duty would also be excluded. This would include anyone who uses hearing aids, glasses, walking sticks, wheelchairs, pacemakers, the list goes on. But obviously this is not the case.

I also went on to waffle on about various Acts and Cases, and I never got a response. 

In 2019, I was relaxing and flicking through Twitter when I read a tweet by a deaf person in America who had been called up for Jury Duty.

They were asking for tips and advice, and I remembered the email that I had sent. I searched my email mailbox and found the original email, and sent it again.

I also said that I would be sending the email on a weekly basis until I got a response, but I didn’t need to do this as I got the below response almost immediately!

“Thank you for resending this email to us. I am very sorry that this was not responded to in June 2017 when you initially sent the email. The Bureau has moved offices since then but we will be taking this forward for you.”

I literally sat there with my mouth open when I read this; I was so pleased to have received a positive response almost immediately! It was made apparent after a few emails that there was no trace of my original email from 2017 and that there was a new office in charge of Jury Summoning.

The team informed me that I should have been given the opportunity to argue my case against a Judge – which is the official procedure. It turns out that I was rejected before I was able to do this. The team put me in contact with Basildon Crown Court and a meeting was set up for me to attend the court and to discuss my need for an interpreter with the Jury Officer and a Judge.

I arrived at the court with my mother, fully expecting to be sat in a small room with an interpreter, the Judge, and the Jury Officer. The Jury Officer explained we were going to view the courtroom and as we took our places in the courtroom, the interpreter signed ‘Please stand for the Judge’.

Needless to say I was confused and terrified! It turns out that the whole situation was being treated in the highest respect and that I had brought a case before the court! The Judge turned out to be the Resident Judge, Judge John Lodge, who is the point of contact for Basildon Crown Court.   

After the initial shock of realising the seriousness of the case, I was able to argue my case against the rejection. Judge John Lodge was very professional and also very kind.

We worked together and placed the interpreter in various places in the courtroom to show that I could view the interpreter from where I was sat. We also discussed the use of a speech-to-text converter and it was agreed that it is a good alternative to having an interpreter in the jury deliberating room.

The law states that only 12 people (the jurors) are allowed in the jury deliberating room, which is why interpreters are not allowed in the room. However having the speech-to-text converter would be a really good replacement in the meantime, until the law is changed (hopefully!!!). 

We also went down to the jury deliberating room to see the size of it and to talk about where I would sit (at the head of the table) and whether I would be able to see all the jurors.

I was able to see and lip-read others from the head of the table so we agreed that it was possible for me to carry out my duty in that room.

After going back up to the courtroom, Judge John Lodge gave a final ruling which stated that I am allowed to carry out my role as a juror with an interpreter in the courtroom, and a speech-to-text converter in the jury deliberating room.

He said there was no evidence to show that I couldn’t perform my duty, and that hopefully this ruling will be a step in the right direction for deaf people who want the opportunity to be jurors.

I felt proud that I had managed to get the outcome that I wanted, and that I was able to prove I am capable to perform my duty. Needless to say I stood there with a massive grin on my face!

I have yet to receive a court date for my jury duty, but hopefully it will be soon.

Unfortunately I am moving away from Essex and therefore might have to fight my case again at another court if I am rejected there. However I am hoping that Judge John Lodge’s ruling will support my case and that I won’t have to go through the whole process again!

I am really looking forward to proving that deaf people are capable of taking part in society and able to be involved in difficult situations successfully.

I am hoping that this is the start of something bigger – something that eventually results in the acceptance of fully qualified BSL Level 6 interpreters into jury deliberating rooms!

I will provide an update on how the court goes once it has been completed! If you have any questions feel free to find me on twitter at the address below!

Chloe is a 24 year old NHS Improvement Analyst based in London. She enjoys spending time with loved ones, including her cat, Millie. She is currently developing her DIY skills by up-cycling old furniture and enjoys countryside walks, yoga, and sci-fi TV shows. She is also on Twitter at @ChloeAlexNorton.