First Korean “Jury Trial” Concludes
by Brendon Carr
Law.com reported today that Korea’s first-ever criminal trial held with the participation of a panel of citizens concluded Tuesday in Taegu with a guilty verdict for a 27 year-old man who broke into the apartment of a 70 year-old lady to rob her, injuring the old woman in the process.
Anyone who knows the Korean justice system could predict the outcome: A suspended sentence of four years’ two and a half years’ imprisonment, based on mitigating factors like the fact the assailant didn’t mean to hurt her, and that he took her to the hospital and turned himself into police. Okay, you got me on that one—sounds like a robber/assailant with a conscience. Still, beating up an old lady should get you some actual punishment…
The citizens’ advisory panel (it’s not correct to call them a “jury” just yet, as the panel merely offers the judge a non-binding recommendation after the trial) deliberated for several hours (good) before returning with a finding of guilt and a collection of sentencing recommendations which tended to favor suspension of the jail term.
The JoongAng Daily’s report on the same trial noted the high level of public interest in participating:
The regional court sent notice letters last month to 230 candidates, selected at random among residents of the district. Prosecutors and defense lawyers picked the nine official jurors, with three substitutes, from among 86 potential jurors.
“I am surprised that more citizens than expected appeared in court to participate in the first trial by jury,” said Um Jong-gyu, a judge of the Daegu District Court. “Many people have expressed an interest in the new system and more and more people want to take part in a trial.”
As an American lawyer, I am a firm believer in the wisdom of the jury system, grotesque outcomes like the OJ Simpson murder trial notwithstanding. (And as an aside, as a Red Stater I believe in the “castle doctrine” whereby anyone coming into another’s home uninvited does so on notice that he may be shot dead or otherwise summarily killed by the occupant.)
Korean criminal justice has been tainted by its origin and abuse as an oppressive tool wielded by the Chosun state, Japanese colonial government, and successive cruel Korean military dictatorships. Turning over the apparatus to the people is an important step toward gaining public trust in the fairness of the courts.
Still, the leniency of the sentence raises the issue that because the Korean criminal justice apparatus has mainly been viewed as fundamentally unjust, judges and now juries are generally reluctant to punish convicted criminals. American sentencing is much stiffer.
And I also have some worry about the intersection of Korean emotionalism and xenophobia in cases where the accused is a foreign Public Enemy No. 1, like Lone Star, or—God forbid—some foreign terrorist like the Korean monster who burned down Namdaemun on Sunday. In those cases, an untrained jury seems to be a menace to the fair disposition of justice.
This first jury trial is attracting worldwide interest. My old new nemesis Sean Hayes (he priggishly criticizes my love of colorful phraseology—like “priggish”!) turns up in a report on France 24’s English-language website (possibly also in French, but I do not read French) yesterday, offering well-informed comment and a quote that puts a more friendly spin on the same concern I express above:
The types of cases that would be put before juries are typically very public cases, [Hayes] says. “If the jury gives a guilty verdict, the judge is going to have overwhelming pressure to agree.”
Personally, overwhelming social pressure sounds a lot like an opening to mob rule.
UPDATE—This evening, Sean Hayes writes to correct my earlier statement concerning “four years’ imprisonment”. Such a sentence could not have been suspended. The AP and other press reports are conflicting on the sentence—given that some reports say two and a half years, which would fit the rules for suspension, it could be that the period of suspension is four years. For sentencing-guideline mavens, there is an explanation on Sean’s blog.
Comments
Comments Policy: Comments to Korea Law Blog are moderated. This means abusive, or just plain stupid comments will be deleted. So don't be a jerk. It also means there may be some delay from the time you post a comment to the time it shows up here. If your comment wasn't against the policy, it will show up in a little bit.
-
About Korea Law Blog
Korea Law Blog is brought to you by Brendon Carr, an American lawyer working as a foreign legal consultant for more than 10 years in Seoul. (Brendon is not admitted as an attorney in Korea. But you knew that.) -
Contact Details
-
Tel. +82 (0)2 772 2734
Fax +82 (0)2 772 2800
Mobile +82 (0)10 8788 0750 -
Download My FREE Korea Employment Law FAQ
-
Korean Media
-
Blogroll
-