Legal Definitions - selecti judices

In ancient Roman law, selecti judices referred to the individuals chosen to serve as jurors or judges for a specific trial. These individuals were selected from a larger, official list of eligible citizens, known as the album judicum, which was prepared by a high-ranking Roman magistrate called the praetor.

For any particular case, a specific number of selecti judices would be drawn by lot (a random selection process) from this official panel. Both parties involved in the trial had the right to object to or "challenge" certain potential jurors if they believed they were biased or unsuitable. Once a final group of jurors was agreed upon and accepted by both sides, they were formally sworn into office to hear the evidence and render a decision, much like modern juries.

• Example 1: A Property Boundary Dispute

  Imagine two Roman citizens, Lucius and Gaius, are in a legal dispute over the exact boundary of their adjoining farmlands. Lucius claims Gaius has moved a boundary stone onto his property. To resolve this, the praetor would consult the official list of eligible citizens. From this list, a group of selecti judices would be randomly chosen to hear the case. Both Lucius and Gaius would then have the opportunity to challenge any of these chosen individuals if they knew a juror had a personal connection to the other party or a vested interest in the outcome. The final, accepted group of selecti judices would then be sworn in to examine the evidence, perhaps even visiting the disputed land, and decide where the true boundary lay.

  This example illustrates how the selecti judices were drawn from an official panel by lot and subjected to challenges by the parties for a civil dispute concerning property rights.

• Example 2: An Accusation of Theft

  Consider a scenario where a merchant, Julia, accuses her former slave, freedman Marcus, of stealing valuable goods from her shop after gaining his freedom. This serious accusation would require a formal trial. The praetor would initiate the process by having a number of selecti judices randomly chosen from the standing list of eligible citizens. During the selection process, both Julia and Marcus would be given the chance to object to any potential juror they believed might be prejudiced against them or have a conflict of interest. Once the final panel of selecti judices was established and sworn in, they would listen to testimonies from witnesses, examine any presented evidence, and ultimately determine Marcus's guilt or innocence.

  Here, the selecti judices are shown functioning in a more criminal-like context, emphasizing the random selection from the official list and the critical right of both the accuser and the accused to challenge potential jurors.

• Example 3: A Breach of Contract for Public Works

  Suppose a Roman contractor, Quintus, was hired by the city to build a new aqueduct but failed to complete the project by the agreed-upon deadline, causing significant delays and financial losses for the city. The city council decides to sue Quintus for breach of contract. For this complex case, a group of selecti judices would be randomly selected from the praetor's comprehensive list of citizens qualified to serve. Before the trial commenced, both the city's representative and Quintus would have the right to challenge any of the chosen jurors, for instance, if a juror had a known business rivalry with Quintus or a personal connection to one of the city officials involved. The remaining, unchallenged selecti judices would then take an oath to impartially review the contract terms, assess the extent of the breach, and determine any damages owed.

  This example highlights the use of selecti judices in a contractual dispute involving public works, demonstrating the formal process of drawing from a pre-approved list, the challenge mechanism, and the swearing-in of the jurors.