In reaching the "firm conclusion" that people over 70 should continue to be excluded from serving on juries, the council of circuit judges at least stopped short of impugning their wisdom. But in other respects they were shockingly ageist. They said that problems old people had with their mobility, hearing and eyesight would make them more trouble than they were worth, and would outweigh any savings from not having to compensate them for time off work.
In fact, all the reasons given on behalf of the 600 circuit judges of England and Wales for keeping the existing ban in force sounded extremely self-serving, and none of their objections to elderly jurors remotely insurmountable. It would be as simple to grant anyone with health problems exemption from jury service as it would be to excuse judges who dread the risk that lifting the ban might get them sent back into the courts after retirement at 70.
The judges found it "significant" that some 50% of over-70s claimed they were not fit enough to be jurors; but of course they would say that if they didn't want to serve, as would people of any age. Working people are understandably wary of jury service and the bother it entails. But many over-70s would welcome an opportunity to exercise their minds and judgment again. I'm 70 and have never been called, but I've always dreamed of being like Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men.
