To all the critics of our system - It is still one of, if not the very best in the world but that doesn't mean we can't continue to improve it.
The only 'problem' with expert witnesses is the tendency to allow them to offer evidence beyond their capabilities, such as a medical expert providing statistical analysis of rate of incidences and producing a questionable interpretation of the likelihood of an event.
Would restricting jury service to 'professional' jurors in any way make that jury less prone to bias or would it in any way help keep our justice system be 'public' and open to all? In a complex case can any juror ever be certain that he or she has given the correct weight to the most relevant piece of evidence? The fact that less educated jurors might place greater weight on particular aspects of a case can be argued to be a reflection of the values of the British public. If our education standard hasn't changed since the 50's then why are we criticising our system now?

Nigel Jaggers, Newcastle, UK

The Jury system must be made to work for the people it represents, the citizens of the country. The Jury selection must be handled in a way in which the Jurors are made to understand the gravity of evidence presented to them as the only evidence adhering to the crime. Experts in the faculty they represent are only that; they ar NOT witnesses and should be, if necessary called upon only to provide into laymen's language an interpretation of terms. Above all the accused, more than anyone else in the courtroom has to understand the order of process.

Esther Murdoch, Giffnock, Scotland

Sincerely hope that this miscarriage of justice has a happy ending for Keran and her family. The case should never have come to court in the first place and Thames Valley Police should take a long and hard look at themselves for the heartache they have caused not only to Keran's family but also to Maeve's.

Judy Davis, Hull, England

Thames valley police should be ashamed of themselves if they had to call on a team (numerous) of experts to provide their opinions rather than factual evidence to obtain a conviction. What happened to good policing and hard evidence?

Leslie Kernow, North East England,

The Judge in summing up didn't use the word "killed". to Keran Henderson....he actually said .."died in your care", so it looks like he didn't believe it either. Why did Thames Valley Police need more than a dozen expert witnesses if they were so sure? Miscarriage of Justice.....unlock the door.

James Bothwell, Poole, England

Hum, "Expert", break the sound down:
"Ex" = a has-been.
"Spurt" = a drip under pressure.

Philip Sherlock, Coventry, West Midlands

I'm with Eric on this. My jury experience during a long fraud trial, is that only a couple of people stay awake and make notes so that they can evaluate the evidence, often in the teeth of a silver-tongued barrister. The rest don't have a clue what's going on.

Mandy Holloway, London,

Another woman branded , harried in prison and presumed guilty by an expert.

jane, Whittlesey, UK

We here in Ontario,Canada have to face the fact that innocent people have been sent to prison because of incompetence of a so called medical expert.Hundred's of cases are now being re-examined due to this Doctor's negligence.It's a good thing we no longer have capital punishment.

Robert Roach, Ottawa, Canada

It really depends on how good the barrister is as to whether someone gets convicted or not. I have read some about some cases in the media recently (a particular rape case) and it beggers belief that the the accused got off.

The system we have is the best system but some people are so gulible and so easily led that they should not be allowed to cross the road on their own let alone stand in judgement of someone's whole future.

Maybe a competence test should be set before each juror sits on a jury.

kim, London,

Your right Vince perhaps the jury room should be reserved for educated Times readers only.......like youself.

chris, london, norfolk

I am ashamed of our system. Convicting someone on Expert Opinion is wrong and very dicey ground to have our Legal system work on.
These experts have no come back if they get it wrong or change their minds....how many are now being struck off but in the mean time have ruined many lives?
The system needs to be changed.

LJ, Bucks,

I was on a jury many years ago in which an expert gave testimony about how a young girl had been sexually assaulted and why the defendant had done it. It was obvious from the outset from other testimony that the crime could not possibly have been committed at all, let alone by the defendant, as the location of the alleged offence did not exist. Not Guilty was the inevitable outcome, yet the jury witnessed the bizarre spectacle of watching an expert deluding herself, and attempting to delude us, into believing the exact opposite.

phil, Suffolk, UK

When I first read about this case I was immediately convincesd that Mrs Henderson was innocnt. I am so glad the jury have come to their senses. I hope this innocent victim of a very iffy system will be able to live her life in peace.

Delphine, Oxford,

They convicted her because the UK accepts majority verdicts from juries. You can have a conviction where two of the jurors disagree - and I imagine that these two jurors are the ones in disagreement.

Martin Evans, Newmarket, Suffolk

God save us from these so called experts.

As someone famously said "expert" is just another word for "charlaton"

Joe, London,

Eric, The jury system is a joke. The plebs haven't a clue. I've been on a few and heard some utter drivel in the jury room. Idiots showing a complete lack of understanding of the process and the evidence placed in front of them - just like voting for their local politician cause they knew their granny.

The specialists might get things wrong however their views are at least educated by experience and past evidence which is always improving however it's the lawyers that ultimately do the convincing - after all, 'you heard what the expert said. What other conclusion could you possibly reach?'.

Vince, Glasgow, Scotland

We'll be seeing calls for the jury system to be abolished soon then. The legal and medical professions won't like the plebs questioning their judgement.

eric campbell, harrogate, uk

so why did they convict her

w mcc, london,

Another frame-up about to crater.

Andrew Milner, Yokohama, Japan