STAC 5/P56/17r

From Rpalmer
Jump to: navigation, search

Case Book BL Harley MS 2143 fo. 40v. Embracery. A misdemeanor in 2 jurors a bailiff and a plaintiff in an action for discovering in which side the jury would pass before their verdict and whilst the jury were together. Richard Poole, plaintiff; George Smith, Richard Fletcher and 2 others of a jury, defendants, for perjury and other misdemeanors the defendant Smith after the jury were gone from the bar and committed to the charge of the said Fletcher being then a bailiff sworn to see that none should have access unto them did nevertheless send unto the said bailiff to let him understand how the same verdict would pass, who both conferred with the two defendants that were of the jury and his man was also permitted by the same bailiff to have access unto them by whom the defendant of the jury sent word to the said Smyth that the verdict would pass with his lessed by which means he did appear to the same cause and was not nonsuit for which offence the defendants were committed and fined at £20 apiece and ordered to bear no office of bailiff nor they any jurors hereafter. Michaelmas 27 Elizabeth (kk)

Case Book BL Harley MS 2143 fo. 58r. Jurors complained of for finding indictment contrary to their evidence not here examinable for that was for the king. Jurors punished for giving of false verdict contrary to the evidence in acquitting felons and others against the king. Vide diverse cases of this kind 1 and fo. 14 huius libri examinable. Poole, plaintiff; Burnard et al, of a grand jury, defendants, charged in the plaintiff’s bill both with finding bills of indictment contrary to their evidences and for receiving bribes and rewards corruptly to that purpose the defendants demurred to the first part of the bill vidt for finding of bills of indictment contrary [58v.] to their evidence and to the other part of the bill they pleaded not guilty and therefore prayed that as much as the calling of a grand jury in question in this manner, to their charge and expenses, would be a discouragement for others to perform the like service and that they have severally denied upon their oaths the taking of any bribes or rewards being the only matter where with they are charged and here examinable that the court would dismiss the cause alleging that there had been diverse precedents in the like cases but for that there could not any such precedent be produced the court did forbear to dismiss the cause but referred it to Mr Justice Walmsley who certified that the defendants were to answer but only to the taking of bribes and rewards and to no other part of the bill. Hillary 36 Elizabeth (kk)

See STAC Poole