Jurors sentenced after web search halted trial

Two jurors who caused a trial to collapse after conducting their own research on the internet have been given suspended jail sentences.

Kevin Hurford, 55, and Emma Jackson, 38, had been selected to be jurors in a child sex case at Lincoln Crown Court in August last year.

However, the case had to be halted when other members of the panel sent a note raising concerns about research being carried out by fellow jurors. The jury then had to be discharged and the case could not be re-tried until April this year.

Both defendants, who had no previous convictions, admitted a charge of sharing research with other jurors. They were each sentenced to eight months imprisonment, suspended for two years.

Hurford, of Abbotsford Way, Lincoln, and Jackson, of Langer Close, Lincoln, must also complete 240 hours of unpaid work in the community and pay £150 costs.

The jury had sworn an oath and had been given directions by the trial judge, Recorder Graham Huston, not to carry out their own research into the case.

Michael Cranmer-Brown, mitigating for Hurford, said he admitted to other jurors he had Googled the defendant after being shown something by Jackson.

Cranmer-Brown told the court Hurford had been deeply impacted by the evidence in the trial and still could not understand why he took it upon himself to make further investigations.

The court heard Hurford had led an otherwise "impeccable life," working as a bus driver, caring for his mother and suffering from his own health problems.

Paul O'Shea, mitigating for Jackson, said she told the police and court staff what she had done and on what device. She also admitted showing it to the co-accused.

"She remains devastated to this day that those people in that case had to wait for it be tried again," he said.

"She accepts she has never been so stupid in her life."

The court heard Jackson had suffered the recent loss of both her parents to cancer.

Passing sentence, Judge Simon Hirst said "it was very sad" that two otherwise law-abiding members of the public had put themselves in peril of a prison sentence through "sheer folly".

He told both defendants there had to be a deterrent because of the need for a re-trial, the impact on other court cases and the significant cost to the public.

He said it was only strong personal mitigation and the way both jurors behaved after they were exposed that had "just persuaded" him to suspend their sentences.

He said it was also significant that the child witnesses had not been required to give evidence during the second trial.

Listen to highlights fromLincolnshire on BBC Sounds, watch thelatest episode of Look North.

Download the BBC News app from the App Storefor iPhone and iPad orGoogle Play for Android devices