UNHEARD TALES OF WOE

I suppose it was Rumpole of the Bailey 1978-1992 and Crown Court 1972 - 1984 which were the forerunners of UK television producers` obsession with legal drama just as it was Dixon of Dock Green 1955 - 1976 which heralded the infinitely variable police series for British audiences.  Indeed the first and last mentioned of these productions became almost a metaphor for the real life activities of their fictional characters. At their root of course was character and plot; the essential ingredients of any first class story whether in print, celluloid or electrons.  The following few tales hardly represent even <1% of daily offerings in the drama of our courts but in the fertile minds of legal and crime writers they could be the seeds to stimulate yet another tale of good - v - evil, prosecution - v - defence , police - v - criminal, justice -v - injustice: all grist to the mill of crime writing.

The wave of support for the cause of Palestinians has gone through western society like a dose of salts through a constipated fatso with middle class students amongst the most vociferous both in America and here.  No campus has arguably been seen as more affected than Cambridge.  In summing up the confrontation between police and students the judge in this case said, "rights to free speech and assembly did not give protesters an "unqualified right" to choose where and how to protest."  

The proscribing of Palestine Action has given very serious overtones to those who might be described as rent-a-protester filling the streets against use of oil, against deniers of climate change, against deniers of immigration limitation and any cause which seems to be worthy of  being defined as "progressive" in their circumscribed mindset.  That so many deny an underlying racist element in their opposition to the legislation is exemplified by the first of three comments published in this report which going by its free subscription is akin to a stalking horse for those who would remake western society and its historic legacy. 

The courts and the public have to listen to some truly evil offenders whose aim is to destroy the very essence of witnesses who testify against them despite ever more efforts to protect them through the legal process. In the days of the razor gangs in the East End and South Side of Glasgow in the 1920s and 1930s that city was described in the novel of the same name as No Mean City.  Whilst the current weaponry of a drug riven society might have changed the sociopaths on trial can be as evil as their forebears when their treatment in the dock is protected by decades of liberal legislation.  As in many cases concurrent sentences for dissimilar offences seem incongruous.  A fine example of current court reporting is available here.  

The case of Clive Freeman should serve as another warning to those who still consider that British justice is the world`s finest where it`s more important that the guilty are acquitted than the innocent are convicted. The recent TV programmes on fictitious juries sitting on "real" cases should be a warning to all that our current jury system is arguably not fit for purpose. This blog 02/09/2025. 

When there is a former soldier who served in Northern Ireland  on trial for committing  murder in 1972 we should be concerned. The trial of former British paratrooper Lance Corporal Soldier F opened this week in Belfast. He is charged with two murders and five attempted murders on Bloody Sunday in Derry in 1972. In 1991 with The Troubles at their bloody height three men in the province were found guilty of plotting to kill members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary.  The Appeal Court has recently overturned their convictions.  If ever serious insurrection took place in Great Britain the law has overwhelming power to render the illegalities in Northern Ireland in that period as merely a prelude to what would happen here.  

With a direct instruction from the Ministry of Justice by its former boss that custodial sentences should be carefully rationed how can we be sure that sentencing is still under the control of the courts i.e. judges and magistrates consider all the evidence and applying the Guidelines come to a reasoned conclusion?  In simple terms; we can`t.  Colin Robson-Durrance appears to be a beneficiary of legal conjuring the effect of which is not unlikely to diminish public faith and confidence in our justice system as much as any tinkering at the legal edges. 

Most of us will not approach any of the scenarios which engulfed those described above but around each case a talented author could produce a tale of woe of which  Kafka would have been proud encompassing our legal processes.  Next time a riveting story as described in the opening paragraph holds some fascination consider that it might be based on hundreds of cases of which we will never have heard.  

PRISON CELL SHORTAGE TAIL WAGS THE DOG OF SENTENCING

Over the last few weeks my posting has been looking at magistrates courts through what some readers might consider perhaps the wrong end of the telescope.  This was not the intention. Public events appeared to be of some significance for us all.  Perhaps in popular jargon the observations of the last month or two might be described as having been commenting from a macro point of view on the justice system.  However from the position of a magistrate, the micro position faces similar conflicts as I faced for seventeen years with considerably more flexibility than those currently on the bench.  Magistrates in the last century were certainly in much greater control of their situation than now.  We were free to discuss in our opinion what truly mattered to us in private meetings three or four times a year.  Whether that freedom made us better at the job is not for me to opine.  So, returning to what has actually happened in our courts recently the sample of cases below is not necessarily typical of a days sitting and they are  but a tiny example of the thousands of cases weekly which generally stimulate little public interest.

A police officer on duty is bitten by a woman who says she has aids and assaults another.  Her custodial sentence is suspended. Seems that for all the bluster from government on the protection of police officers and other public servants the reality is that owing to a broken jail system the bench had no other  option [possibly after advice from their legal advisor]. The sentencing guideline for the offence is here.   

Stalking became a specific criminal offence in England and Wales on November 25 2012 through amendments to the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 introduced by the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. Before this date stalking was often dealt with under the more general harassment laws but the new legislation created separate, specific offences for stalking.   I cannot remember sitting on such a case but I was around when measures to protect a witness giving evidence were in play. So congratulations to the bench in  Haverfordwest who were able to decide that an alleged victim`s live evidence was essential for a case to continue despite CPS protestations. When justice so often puts the "victim" before common sense and innocent until proved guilty I would opine that it takes a strong and well led bench to act as that bench has done.  

The numbers of trading standards officers have been cut to the bone in many{most} boroughs with the result that children find it fairly easy and risk free to source a retail outlet where tobacco and alcohol products are available. Hartlepool is no exception. There is no public register of how many such people are employed by that borough.  A Hartlepool committee agenda (Neighbourhood Services Committee 4 Nov 2024) lists staffing in the Trading Standards section and includes 3 × Senior Trading Standards Officers and 1 × Graduate Trading Standards Officer. Information seems to being deliberately withheld or almost impossible to verify. That being the case I am certain the council were pleased to read the following report. As is so often the case in such matters the lowly shop worker is chastised and the owner, private or corporate, goes scot free. 

In the Tony Blair era government brought in the gone but not forgotten ASBO primarily to enable the scourge of unruly neighbours to be confronted by the civil law a breach of which was a criminal offence.  It was replaced in 2014 by the Anti-Social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act which spawned Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs), Civil Injunctions, Community Protection Notices (CPNs), Public Spaces Protection Orders (PSPOs) and Dispersal Powers.  This offender in the Isle of Wight must have been as the devil incarnate for his neighbours and in a society which offered adequate resources for the mentally disabled might have avoided his decline which affected those living nearby. The District Judge[MC] uttered comments which we as magistrates were strongly advised to resist, do not say anything which might indicate a future sentence by a future bench. 

In Cornwall the local reporter has relayed to the public reading CornwallLive a masterpiece of court reporting; reporting  as it used to be in the 20th century before the age of the internet. Thomas Hammersley seems, as many others, to have been the recipient of a sentence not meeting the seriousness of the crime.  Even if the image is generic a baseball bat with nails in it is a deadly weapon. 

It seems the composition of  Swansea Council’s Trading Standards team is a secret known only to those who pay their wages.  My guess is that like so many other towns, boroughs, counties and cities the department of trading standards has been pruned to the limit resulting in only a tiny percentage of infractions being acted upon never mind being charged. What is reported in Swansea is an indication of what serious repercussions can result when we the public are sold contaminated or unsuitable food.    

If ever there was an example of why dog owners should have thought as to how to secure their pet when driving this is it.  Sentencing has been postponed.  I wonder if that will be another example of the tail of the prison cell shortage wagging the dog of justice. 

TREASURY ££ -v- PUBLIC CONFIDENCE

It was with a perhaps muted fanfare that recently the now former Lord Chancellor [the 11th since 2010] announced that there would be set up a new level of intermediate criminal court over which a District Judge[MC] would preside with two lay magistrates as wingers. After a mixed reception from the legal profession all has gone quiet on the proposal.  If, however, the concept were to materialise there are many questions arising.

Currently DJs sit alone answerable to no one excepting themselves, their conscience and the Appeal Court or  Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.  That will not change.  What will change will be training programmes for DJs.  Just as Crown Court judges have training for sitting on appeals with two magistrates as wingers to deal with fact finding and/or sentencing similar training will be necessary for DJs.  This will be conducted through the Judicial College.  Crown Court judges’ training covers criminal procedure, sentencing, appellate review and the particular role of the Crown Court when exercising appellate jurisdiction from magistrates.  It is not unlikely that DJs are likely to receive similar training for serving in any newly proposed intermediate courts alongside magistrates but with some important caveats.  The Criminal Courts Review explicitly recommended that, in the event of structural changes such as creating a unified Criminal Court joint training for District Judges and magistrates would become necessary. It suggested that the Judicial Studies Board should oversee the development of such training and involve DJs  actively in training magistrates as well.  I remember all too well that at my court we were fortunate to have two DJs who excelled at training sessions; indeed who put those who professed specialised qualifications in such tasks as rank amateurs.  Magistrates will also need refreshed training to work effectively in these new intermediate courts covering collaboration, sentencing responsibilities and procedural changes.  I would opine that experienced magistrates who undertake chairing responsivities as presiding magistrates might be dismayed if such sittings are much reduced. Perhaps there will be a two tier structure.  Currently interested parties can only speculate.  

If intermediate courts are introduced (handling either-way cases that might otherwise go to the Crown Court for jury trial) then this immediately raises the number of sitting days required from DJs and consequently additional DJs would likely need to be recruited to ensure availability and avoid bottlenecks.  There is a possibility that magistrate recruitment might be affected.  In the last two years over £1 million has been spent on such efforts. Sitting in a more “serious” jurisdiction (cases that would otherwise go to the Crown Court) may make the role more attractive to volunteers but on the other hand such cases can be more time consuming which could deter younger people sacrificing earning potential but encouraging older and/or retired JPs to offer increased sittings. 

As with selection of magistrates qualified to sit on Crown Court appeals there might develop a two tier system for the proposed new intermediate court where a higher level of experience and competence will be needed to sit as a winger: a Premier League and a Championship?  The driving forces for the proposals are the unsustainable backlog at Crown Courts and the reduced costs of summary versus jury trials.  However the increased costs of employing the additional DJs required would go some way to mitigate the hoped for savings.  

In the long run this might have the negative effect of reducing the participation of magistrates in all but the most minor offences and be a stepping stone to a completely professional judiciary. For many criminal lawyers it would be an overdue and welcome positive effect.  All this speculation might be premature. As of now there’s no sign of consultation or training course outlines specifically tailored to the proposed intermediate courts.  Considering that this nation`s justice system is now operating under its 12th boss in 25 years is it any wonder that chaos reigns?  On the 6th prime minister within that same period only adds to the disfunction of the political environment which has resulted.  

Without Justice the concept of a free democratic society is a chimera.  Even when the J factor is still alive and occasionally kicking there must be public confidence in its function.  That confidence is daily being eroded. It`s hard to see how the proposed court changes will be of value except in the balance sheet at the Treasury. 

NO TO HUNG JURY OR SCOTS VERDICT SO COMPROMISE RULES THE DAY. NOT SATISFACTORY

First shown: Channel 4 Tuesday 26 August 2025 "The Jury: Murder Trial" was fascinating for me as probably it was for many with an interest in how justice works in England and Wales.  I would opine that in the last year or two trial by jury; its history, implications, limitations and future have crossed the minds of many people who previously have not had a care how the guilty are found guilty and the innocent acquitted.  At least that`s the theory.  Indeed it has been a subject here over the last few weeks. 

Last night I watched the final most dramatic episode also available on Channel 4 online. The 12 jurors seemed to belong to three groups of people:

1. Those whose inner beliefs or inbuilt prejudices seemed to be a filter through which they digested the information presented to them.

2. Those who despite having an opportunity refused to consider only the evidence or apply reasoned analysis.

3. Those who seemed to be influenced by the most recent argument put to them and felt overwhelmed by the position of  responsibility into which they were thrust.  

The result was a compromise decision brought about by fearing to announce that they were a hung jury.  I would suggest that if this trial had been under Scots law a verdict of "not proven" would have been a more likely result because that in effect would have reflected the reality. The final verdict of manslaughter did not appear to have been a logical ending to a finely balanced argument.  It was compromise that in our English legal system was like trying to square a circle.  That justice was done and seen to be done is a moot point.  The stark contrast between the guilty group and the acquitters  underscores how verdicts can diverge despite identical evidence simply due to personality clashes, emotional biases or group dynamics.   All 12 were startled when the judge told them that the verdict of the jury at the actual trial some time previously was guilty of murder.  If ever there was cause to take a deep breath this was it.  If ever there was "proof" of the capriciousness that is in effect "the jury system" and a clear argument for eg a judge and two assessors to decide on guilt or innocence this was it.

Missing from the production was any reference to the manner in which the foreman was chosen.  As any magistrate will attest the quality and abilities of that individual who should control the parameters of the discussion and direct attention to vital areas of the evidence was IMHO an omission where realism was sacrificed for time considerations and/or more dramatic conversations or pieces to camera which seem to have been dominated by a young woman in pink and a retired chef.  The programme brought into stark relief the disturbing situation when prosecution and defence counsel offer to the jury evidence from "experts" who have opposing opinions.  Two decades or more ago when DNA statistics` analyses were in their infancy and thrown at jurors like tennis balls from an automatic server, opposing apparently authoritative "experts" served their opposite opinions  to jurors, likening them to answers from a deity.  Currently the Lucy Letby case is provoking considerable discord among experts who testified and those now being consulted by the defence working towards a retrial. 

In sum the last part leaves viewers torn: empathising with everyday citizens attempting gravely serious legal work but also troubled by the system’s susceptibility to bias, spectacle and inconsistency.