Comments are usually moderated. However, I do not accept any legal responsibility for the content of any comment. If any comment seems submitted just to advertise a website it will not be published.
Tuesday, 25 March 2025
ANYTHING YOU SAY MIGHT BE USED ETC ETC ETC
Tuesday, 18 March 2025
THE END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS, YOU REAP WHAT YOU SOW AND TIME WILL TELL
Thursday, 13 March 2025
Tuesday, 11 March 2025
BETWEEN THE DEVIL AND DEEP BLUE SEA
Not all countries have sentencing guidelines. This paper from America might be of interest. It was 1999 that the state of Michigan initiated the American idea of sentencing guidelines and it was from that origin that similar guidelines developed in the British nations. I have no doubt that with AI so far advanced that it`s only a matter of a few years until the sentencing process itself will be AI driven with human input as a failsafe.
Thursday, 6 March 2025
Tuesday, 4 March 2025
INEQUALITY OF ARMS + UNLEVEL PLAYING FIELD
The Victim Personal Statement scheme was introduced in England and Wales in 2001 following a commitment in the Victims' Charter of 1996. The right to submit a VPS is contained in the Victims' Code. In contrast to other jurisdictions the right is not currently based in statute. The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime in England and Wales is available here. The VPS doesn`t affect the nature of the sentence on its own but its purpose is to help the judge to make a better informed decision on sentencing by taking into account the overall effect the crime has had on the victim. It follows that the quality of the statement might persuade a judge to override the level of sentence according to the guidelines. Can it honestly now be the case that the system is truly neutral when the result of an action according to the prosecution [victim] is a consideration indicating that crimes of ostensible equality result in unequal sentencing? The concept of equality before the law or level playing field is supposed to convince British citizens that long standing traditions now brought up to modern standards are the birthright of all. And despite rare exceptions we are expected to believe that the old adage British is Best applies to the forms of justice encountered daily not only through the legal system but with myriad councils, tribunals and supervisory bodies etc. In polite terms there will be little disagreement that the preceding sentence is now wishful thinking or perhaps colloquially, bollocks.
Early training as a magistrate in the years before the millenium emphasised that the so called legal level playing field between state and defendant was a pillar of justice. How compliant my colleagues and I were to listen blithely to the trainer. Equality of arms was another euphemism employed to imbibe we newbies with the philosophy that nowhere on this Earth was there a justice system where individuals were more able to be assured that they would receive a fair hearing and trial where they would have every opportunity to plead their innocence.
I think my disillusionment was triggered by the establishment of the victim surcharge introduced in the UK in April 2007 as a flat rate of £15 initially only applied to offenders receiving a fine; however it has since been expanded to apply to most criminal sentences with the amount varying depending on the severity of the sentence and the offender's age, essentially making offenders contribute to the cost of supporting victims and witnesses of crime. The current rates are available to view here. But the proceeds are not ring fenced for actual victims of crime: proceeds are pooled into a general fund used to finance victim support services in general. Unlike fines the charge is not means tested.
Level playing field or equality of arms is currently just a joke akin to the Hollywood advice, “Never bring a knife to a gunfight”. A ruinous combination of legal aid lawyers` derisory fees and increasingly raised income levels before an application for legal aid is possible, loads the odds firmly with the state and against the defendant. The introduction of the Single Justice Procedure in 2015 was an anathema to those who considered that it was a step too far in favour of the state. Between 1 April 2019 and 30 September 2023, some 3,102,392 criminal cases were processed by the Single Justice Service as the S was renamed.
Statistics on SJP are hard to come by. What can be said is that about 40,000 cases monthly are processed but the whole process is a carbuncle on the face of justice. A Freedom of Information Request of 2021 is copied below.
request-@whatdotheyknow.com
Disclosure Team
Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London
SW1H 9AJ
Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) Request – 2xxxxxxxx
Thank you for your request received on 5th June 2021 in which you asked for the following information from the Ministry of Justice (MoJ):
1. How many cases have been dealt with by the Single Justice Procedure annually?
2. Of the above how many defendants in each of the years above responded with a
plea?
3. Of the pleas from question 2. how many were guilty pleas?
4. Of those pleading not guilty in each of the above years since inception how many actually went to trial at magistrates courts?
5. Of those at trial per Q4. how many were acquitted?
6. How many cases brought under Covid 19 regulations have been pursued through the SJP in 2020?
7. Of the numbers per Q6. how many responded with a plea?
8. Of those in answer to Q7. how many were guilty pleas?
9. Of those pleading not guilty in Q7. how many elected trial at magistrates court?
10. Of those electing trial as per Q9. how many were acquitted?
11. How many magistrates are currently trained and eligible to be included in the approved list as Single Justices?
12. Please list the courts where the SJP is functioning.
It has been answered by Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) on behalf of MoJ.
The information that you have requested in these questions would be held in individual case files for the last three years (In accordance with MoJ Record Retention and Disposition
Schedules), but in order to provide it HMCTS/MoJ would have to identify the files in question and then locate them, retrieve and extract the information requested. We believe that the cost of doing that would exceed the appropriate limit. Consequently, we are not obliged to comply with your request.
time period covered by your request and / or specifying particular Courts to be included in scope. Please be aware that we cannot guarantee at this stage that a refined request will fall within the FOIA cost limit, or that other exemptions will not apply. In particular you should be aware of the FOIA exemptions that apply under Section 32 and which relate to information that is only held for the purpose of the Court Record.
Year 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020
The number of cases dealt with by the Single Justice Procedure annually since its inception. 12,660 357,006 687,645 738,028 786,546 529,408
The number of cases brought under Covid 19 regulations and pursued through the SJP in 2020.3,610
NOTES relating to the above data.
• The case count is based upon the case completion date falling between each reporting period (eg. 1st January 2015 to 31st December 2015) where the initiation type is equal to Single Justice Notice.
• Data are taken from a live management information system and can change over
time.
• Data are management information and are not subject to the same level of checks as official statistics.
• The data provided is the most recent available and for that reason might differ slightly from any previously published information.
• Data has not been cross referenced with case files.
• Although care is taken when processing and analysing the data, the details are subject to inaccuracies inherent in any large-scale case management system and is the best data that is available.
Plea entered
Guilty No plea entered
plea
Not guilty plea
2015 12,031 2,779 286 8,966
2016 329,406 83,333 10,196 235,877
2017 696,935 169,585 24,121 503,229
2018 761,995 185,107 26,276 550,612
2019 784,325 199,279 23,136 561,910
2020 535,590 145,605 11,612 378,373
2020 4,007 437 23 3,547
• SJP offences under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015, allows cases involving
adults charged with summary offences to be dealt with in a single magistrate sitting without the prosecutor or defendant being present.
• Only one offence is counted for each defendant in the case. If there is more than one offence per defendant that complete on the same day, a set of validation rules applies to select one offence only and these relate to the longest duration, seriousness and the lowest sequence number of the offence.
• Includes cases completed in the magistrates' courts during the specified time period,
where no further action is required by the magistrates' courts.
• Includes cases that are committed to the Crown Court.
• SJP cases are identified in the centrally collated data based on the ‘initiation type’ recorded against the case. It is known that a small number of cases have incorrect initiation types recorded against them, with incompatible offences under SJP included within the overall reported counts, e.g. triable either way, indictable and summary imprisonable offences categorised under 'Other offences'. It is estimated that this accounts for well under 1% of the total defendants dealt with across the series. Where errors do exist the levels are monitored and appropriate action to understand and improve data quality are taken.
• Following a technical issue during the LIBRA Management Information System refresh, a small amount of data was not included for a single day in September. It is estimated this that has resulted in a small number (less than 1%) of case disposals being omitted from the latest quarterly totals. A refresh of the data will take place next quarter.
• Offence classification and categorisation as per the latest published 'Offence group classification' available at the following link
(https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-justice-system-statistics-quarterlydecember-2020).
• All Not Guilty pleas under SJP are regarded as going to trial.
• The defendant counts supplied are sourced from the same underlying administrative system as the case counts, however they are distinct extracts taken at different points in time and as such caution should be taken when comparing absolute
volumes across the series.
• The defendant counts form the basis of the published criminal court statistics timeliness measures released by the Ministry of Justice. The overall counts may differ from HMCTS caseloads due to the validation which is applied to this data stream, e.g. defendants removed from underlying counts where timeliness validation checks are failed such as blank dates or dates out of logical sequence.
• Published criminal court outcomes statistics released as part of the Criminal Justice Statistics bulletin series does not allow for the separate identification of Single Justice Procedure cases. As such it is not possible to produce statistics which detail the volume of acquittals for SJP cases/defendants dealt with. Also, regarding Question (11), as at May 2021 HMCTS had 12333 adult magistrates. As a matter of practice, newly appointed magistrates are not allocated until they have passed heir appraisal (threshold appraisal). This takes approximately one year and so not all of these may be finally allocated at the date of writing this letter. HMCTS management information systems do not hold data specifically regarding the number of Magistrates within their first year and the FOIA does not oblige a public authority to create information to answer a request if the requested information is not held. The duty is to only provide the recorded information held.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_courts_in_England_and_Wales and https://www.gov.uk/find-court-tribunal
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/3244/pdfs/uksi_20043244_en.pdf
If you are not satisfied with this response you have the right to request an internal review by responding in writing to one of the addresses below within two months of the date of this
response.
data.access@justice.gov.uk
You do have the right to ask the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to investigate any aspect of your complaint. However, please note that the ICO is likely to expect internal
complaints procedures to have been exhausted before beginning their investigation.
Tuesday, 25 February 2025
CHOICES AND POLITICS
It`s unlikely that more than perhaps a few fanatics would argue that Christianity in England is anything other than a religion. Of course that observation would be ridiculed if it were applied to Ireland north and the republic of, Germany where the Christian Democratic Union of Germany has become the largest party after the weekend`s general election. I suppose The European Christian Political Movement is a European political party exclusively working on promoting Christian values and of course evangelical Christians are a major source of support for both Democrats and Republicans in America. The 2021 United Kingdom census recorded an irreligious population of 25.3 million or 37.8% in England. But rarely a month goes by without a report of some woke tribunal, organisation or employer becoming newsworthy by virtue of its decisions on whether certain actions inspired by religious belief are lawful or not.
Wednesday, 19 February 2025
Tuesday, 18 February 2025
IS ANY MINISTRY MORE WOKE THAN THE MOJ?
I would suggest that most readers are aware of Donald Trump`s war on woke. I make no apology for my own opinion on such actions as not before time. I would also suggest that historically this country tends to follow the social trends in USA albeit with a year or three`s delay.
Does the ratio of the ethnicity of District Judges cf magistrates affect outcomes? I would venture to suggest it does not. The appointment of District Judges or more senior judiciary does not for obvious reasons have being local as a requirement and nobody in his/her right mind would suggest otherwise.
“Free Free Palestine. To the Israeli terrorist both in the United Kingdom, the United States and of course Israel, you can run, you can bomb but you cannot hide – justice will be coming for you.”
13. Magistrates in Post
In comparison to judges, a higher proportion of magistrates are female, or from an ethnic minority background.
Sex
Of the 14,576 magistrates in post across England and Wales as at 1 April 2024, 57% were female (five percentage points higher than in 2014). There was no strong variation amongst the regions, ranging from 54% to 61% (Figure 46).
Figure 46: Proportion of female magistrates by region, 1 April 2024

Ethnicity
As at 1 April 2024, ethnic minority individuals together constituted 13% of all magistrates (a five percentage-point increase from 2014 when 8% declared themselves as from an ethnic minority). More specifically for each ethnic minority group[footnote 46]:
- Asian or Asian British individuals constituted 7% of magistrates.
- Black or black British individuals constituted 4% of magistrates.
- Mixed ethnicity individuals constituted 2% of magistrates.
- Individuals from other ethnicities constituted 1% of magistrates.
These proportions showed some variation at a regional level, where London had at least double the proportion of Asian individuals compared to all but one of the regions, and at least treble the proportion of black individuals compared to all other regions (Figure 47).
Figure 47: Proportion of magistrates from each ethnic minority group by region, 1 April 2024

Intersection of Sex and Ethnicity
Table 3.7 shows that just under half (49%) of all magistrates as at 1 April 2024 were white and female. This was followed by the white male group with 38%, and then the ethnic minority female and ethnic minority male groups (8% and 5% respectively).
Age
Magistrates tended to be older than judges on average, with 81% of those in post being 50 and over.
13.1 Magistrates - leavers and new entrants
The proportion of magistrates that left during 2023/24 who were female (55%) or of an ethnic minority background (13%) were both slightly lower than the equivalent proportion of new entrants in 2023/24, at 58% and 15% respectively.
14. Magistrates Recruitment
On 17 January 2022, an updated magistrates’ recruitment process was launched. This update introduced a new applicant tracking system (ATS) which collects information on magistrate recruitment across England and Wales and includes more diversity data on applicants and recommendations for appointment to the magistracy.
This is the second year for which ATS magistrates’ recruitment data is being published[footnote 47]. Figures are now shown on the number of appointments of magistrates, rather than recommendations, with updated figures for 2022/23 given in Table 3.8a.
Beginning with this year’s report, figures are shown for the number of applications concluded on the ATS, made up of those not shortlisted, not appointed and appointed during the year. These will be in contrast to and not comparable with the number of applications started in the year.
The proportions of female individuals and ethnic minority individuals appointed to the magistracy are comparable to those already in post.
14.1 Applications
Table 3.8b shows that during 2023-24, there were 4,025 applications made to become a magistrate[footnote 48].
Sex
More than half (55%) of all magistrate applications submitted in 2023-24 were from female individuals, comparable to the 57% of magistrates already in post. There is some variation by region where the proportion of female candidates for the South East and South West are each below 50% (Figure 48).
Figure 48: Proportion of female magistrate applications submitted in 2023-24, by region

Ethnicity
In total, ethnic minority individuals constituted about 30% of all magistrate applications submitted in 2023-24, more than twice as high as the 13% of magistrates in post[footnote 49]. A wide variation in the proportion of ethnic minority applicants is seen at the regional level (Figure 49), from 9% in the South West and Wales to 51% in London. More specifically:
- Asian or Asian British individuals constituted 16% of applications.
- Black or Black British individuals constituted 9% of applications.
- Mixed ethnicity individuals constituted 4% of applications.
- Individuals from other ethnicity backgrounds constituted 2% of applications.
Figure 49: Representation of ethnic minorities among magistrate applications submitted in 2023-24, by region

Age
On average, those who applied to the magistracy in 2023-24 were younger than magistrates currently in post. 53% of magistrate applications were from candidates aged 50 or over, compared to 81% of magistrates in post.
14.2 Appointments[footnote 50]
Table 3.8b shows that during 2023/24, 2,008 appointments to the magistracy were made in England and Wales[footnote 51].
Sex
Female individuals represented 58% of all magistrate appointments made in 2023-24. The female proportion of appointments by region ranged from 49% in the North West to 67% in London (Figure 50).
Figure 50: Proportion of female magistrate appointments made in 2023-24, by region

Ethnicity
In total, ethnic minority individuals constituted 16% of all magistrate appointments made in 2023-24. More specifically:
- Asian or Asian British individuals constituted 7% of recommendations.
- Black or black British individuals constituted 5% of recommendations.
- Mixed ethnicity individuals constituted 3% of recommendations.
- Individuals from other ethnicity backgrounds constituted 1% of recommendations.
By region, the proportion of those appointed who were from an ethnic minority background ranged from 8% for the South West and Wales, to 36% for London (Figure 51).
Figure 51: Representation of ethnic minorities among magistrate appointments made in 2023-24, by region

Age
Of all the magistrates appointed in 2023-24, 59% of them were aged 50 or over.