The continuing saga
Wilma received her citation for court in advance, so she continued investigating “reasonable adjustments” for jurors. This is also known as reasonable accommodations in some countries. Across the globe, reasonable adjustments are required by law in many countries. In the UK, this falls under the Equality Act of 2010, which ensures that individuals with disabilities are not placed at a disadvantage within the criminal justice system. In the United States, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) similarly ensures equality throughout the justice system. The criminal justice system covers many areas, including perpetrators, victims, witnesses, and jury service. Wilma was interested in ensuring a fair trial for all individuals involved and wanted to make sure her rights as someone with a hidden disability were respected.
The day arrived when she needed to find out if she was on the list for jury service. She called to inquire and was told she would receive a call later in the day if she was shortlisted. Later, she received a call confirming that she had been shortlisted and needed to travel the following week. Disappointed, Wilma then received an email back from the Scottish Courts regarding her request for reasonable adjustments.
Wilma knew she needed two reasonable adjustments:
- Text-to-speech for documents provided: As a slow reader, she uses technology to speed up the process. She has scanning pens that are GDPR-compliant and allowed in key areas of education and work.
- Note-taking support: Wilma is aware of many technologies that aid in this area. She had attached videos demonstrating how these technologies assist dyslexic individuals and sent them to the court system.
The court replied, stating that they always endeavour to make reasonable adjustments where possible but that due to the nature of the proceedings and legal reasons, the apps Wilma suggested could not be supported. Two of the devices she mentioned were GDPR-friendly and designed to help her read documents, so she was unsure why these were not supported. She understood the court’s concerns about the note-taking technology but felt the court system should investigate solutions for dyslexic jurors. After all, jury service is a legal obligation, and the citation mentions a £1,000 fine for failing to comply or providing a legitimate reason for not attending. This fine could cover the costs of tablets that could be issued to dyslexic jurors and returned at the end of the day. This would ensure that sensitive information is not accessible to third parties during discussions or deliberations, and the court system could erase all notes when the equipment is returned, preventing any GDPR violations.
Wilma then asked, “What support is offered for jury service to those with disabilities such as dyslexia or dyspraxia? How do you protect their right to reasonable adjustments under the Equality Act?” Now, having completed her jury service, Wilma is still waiting for an answer.
The Day Arrives
Wilma had arranged to meet a friend for coffee while waiting to find out if she would be selected. Since the bus service in her area was notoriously unreliable, she travelled early and browsed the shops. She found a Marks and Spencer store and automatically searched for the “Big Daddy” bar of chocolate she had seen on TikTok. As usual, it was sold out, so she settled for a large bag of Worcestershire sauce crisps. She received a call telling her what time to turn up to be sworn in for jury service. She met her friend for coffee and brought a homemade potato and chickpea curry as a gift, knowing her friend was a vegetarian.
They discussed court cases, deliberations, and the fact that the court system had not made any effort to support Wilma during her jury service. After their discussion, they went their separate ways, and Wilma joined the queue with the other jurors at the court. After being led to a rather cramped room, she felt uneasy at the thought of a fire alarm going off and trying to evacuate. Then, she was handed a pile of documents to read. They were printed on yellow paper, which was helpful, but not in a dyslexia-friendly font. Everyone around her was flicking through the material’s multiple times, while Wilma felt disadvantaged without her scanning pen.
Not What You Imagine
Eventually, it was time to enter the court. Wilma, a fan of programs like “Bull,” starring Michael Weatherly, which features a psychologist using technology to analyse jurors, attorneys, witnesses, and the accused, quickly realized that the court system in real life was nothing like on TV. The procurator fiscal reminded the jurors of the legal obligations regarding confidentiality and reviewed all the materials in the juror’s pack. Wilma found him to be a quiet speaker and struggled to hear him. Upon returning to the juror’s room, she was relieved to discover she was not the only one who found him difficult to hear. One of the jurors was replaced because they knew the case and the people involved. After this, they were taken back to the court to be sworn in. This marked the end of day one, and everyone went home.
Wilma texted her friend, Dr. Martin Bloomfield, who replied that he had also received a letter calling him for jury service. He laughed, saying he had missed it—the life of a dyslexic! She hoped he wouldn’t be fined.
Day 2
Wilma arrived at court and was escorted to the juror’s room. While waiting, people started chatting and drinking coffee. The case was delayed because one of the jury members hadn’t arrived. While having another coffee, Wilma mentioned she was dyslexic and not allowed to use her assistive technology. After 30 minutes, it was decided the jury would proceed with fourteen people instead of fifteen.
Everyone went to court, and the first witness was brought forward. Wilma had her paper ready for taking notes, creating two columns: “Believable” and “Not Believable.” The prosecutor began questioning, but the witness, suffering from amnesia, could not answer any questions. At this point, the prosecution decided to drop the case and charges. The procurator fiscal apologized, and everyone was led back to the juror’s room. There was speculation among the jurors about whether the missing juror knew something they did not. The court attendant informed them that the case had been dropped and they could all go home. They were instructed to call the helpline to find out if they were needed for the rest of the week.
Wilma called in the evening and learned she had fulfilled her civic duty and was not required to return. Everything she had put on hold could now move forward. However, she still wanted to know what a “reasonable adjustment” for jury service truly meant.