How longest trial in UK left jurors struggling to return to normal life

Edwin McLaren and his wife Lorraine were found guilty after the longest trial in criminal history. Photo / Police Scotland

By Hayley Dixon

Jurors who sat on the Britain's longest ever criminal trial have told how they are struggling to return to work or communicate in the real world.

The 12 men and women spent 20 months listening to complex evidence and say that the experience has left them in need of counselling.

In a rare move for jurors, who are barred by law from discussing anything which happened in the deliberation room, four have now broken ranks to discuss their experience, The Telegraph UK reports.

Julie, Anne-Marie, Paul and Emma - who are only going by their first names to protect their identities - agree that it was an important process but have told how it has destroyed their normal lives.

For 320 days they sat in silence in the High Court in Glasgow and heard how Edwin McLaren, 52, ran a £1.6 million ($2.9m) property fraud scheme and duped vulnerable victims into handing over their homes.

The £7.5m ($13.9m) trial, which was originally only due to last six months, began in September 2015 and by the time McLaren was found guilty in May only 12 of the original 15 jurors remained.

It is believed to be the longest criminal case in the UK's legal history and has seen McLaren jailed for 11 years. His wife Lorraine, 51, was sentenced to two-and-a-half years after being found guilty of two charges

Because there were only 12 of them, the minimum required on a Scottish jury, they knew that if one of them dropped out then the whole case would collapse.

Julie has revealed that she was always a "people person" but since the trial finished she has only managed to get back to her work at a travel agency for a total of four days.

She told the BBC: "I am going through the doctor and trying to get back into it. I'm still struggling. I just felt like I could not even hold a conversation... "You were sitting in a room listening to evidence but you didn't communicate. I'm really struggling with communication now."

After they were thanked by the judge they say they did not know what to do next and have called for more psychological support for those expected to attend court for long periods.

Paul, who said that he thought at points that the trial would "last forever", has struggled to return to his job as a civil servant and has had to go through retraining.

The 51-year-old said: "I'm still not into the swing of things yet. I'm not talking much when I go to work.

"I think I was always talking before this trial, and now I am just sitting at my seat not really saying much."

In the weeks after they returned their verdicts he found himself missing what had become his life, wandering toward the High Court building and visiting local shops.

Another civil servant on the jury, Anne Marie, has also struggled to return her normal life and said that her workplace of 40 years now seems "alien".

Emma, 26, has revealed that she has quit her job and gone back to college to study social sciences as the trial gave her "time to reflect".

But she admitted that she "felt lost at times" and she was supported by her fellow jurors rather than the system, as there was "nothing there for us".

Because the case kept getting delayed or lengthened they could "never see the end of the tunnel", she added.

Anne Marie said that one of the hardest things to adapt to was no longer being a part of the group of 12 who did everything together.

"Even when we were sat on the jury if someone needed the toilet we all went. We did everything together," she said. Paul concluded that 20 months is "far too long" but defended the principle that normal people should try their peers.