OPINIONS OF A DINOSAUR

Last week the High Court rendered a not widely publicised decision on the future fate of the two British prisoners held in Syria by Kurdish forces.  They are accused of being not only Isis terrorists but part of the infamous group of murderers who filmed their murder by decapitation with a knife of innocent people and broadcast their horrendous deeds to the world.  This was part of a cold blooded exercise to terrorise those who opposed their attempts to impose Sharia over vast areas of Iraq and Syria.  The Home Secretary had agreed their extradition to the USA where they could be subject to the death penalty if found guilty of the charges laid against them.  That High Court decision leaves the way clear for them to face the legal system of a foreign jurisdiction where if found guilty for their alleged crimes the death penalty is an option.  

The Home Secretary has explained this apparent anomaly insofar as the death penalty has long been abolished in the UK.  "Our longstanding opposition to the death penalty has not changed. Any evidence shared with the US in this case must be for the express purpose of progressing a federal prosecution."

From time to time polls have indicated that there are deep divisions in this country on whether or not Parliament should reverse the abolition decision which was initiated half a century ago and when assurances were made by parliamentarians that adequate custodial sentences would not lead to increases in homicides.  This was a fatuous affirmation to the great British public. Proponents of the current position are quick to cite that only a few nations including certain states in the USA use the death penalty  and that these are indeed mainly countries where democracy is in name only. 

Two years ago a poll indicated that EU Leavers were sympathetic to bringing back capital punishment.  Last year Sky News published a poll showing that Conservatives had a majority also similarly in favour.  Having the good fortune to still be on this Earth after having enjoyed three scores year and ten and having been accused of being a dinosaur I am firmly of the belief that social mores work on a cyclical basis where opinions swing just as the weight of a pendulum reaches its amplitude and reverses its direction of motion. I believe that we are in just such a situation where the amplitude is about a decade or so from the vertical.  The discussions over the EU are just a single example of this.  The return of capital punishment could be another.  

IF NOT CUSTODY; WHAT????

RECENT cases dealt with by Taunton Magistrates' Courts include:

Richard Anthony Ward Coombes, 42, of no fixed address, two counts of theft as a trespasser, 12 weeks prison (consecutive) on each count, £780 compensation; theft as a trespasser; damaged a detention cell, one week prison (consecutive); used threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour, two weeks prison (consecutive); caused a nuisance or disturbance to an NHS staff member, possession of cannabis, breached a criminal behaviour order, no separate penalty. (G). 

The above is copied from yesterday`s "This Is The West Country."
The report below is copied from "The Gazette" [Blackpool] yesterday.

Blackpool Magistrates' Court

A father-of-eight repeatedly messaged his former partner in breach of a court order. Lee Morement even contacted a male friend of his ex’s and tried to dissuade him from having a relationship with her, even though they were only platonic friends. Morement, 36, of Ribble Road, Blackpool, pleaded guilty to failing to comply with a restraining order. He was sentenced to 16 weeks jail and ordered to pay £115 victims’ surcharge by District Judge Jane Goodwin sitting at Blackpool Magistrates’ Court. The judge told him: “You have yet again broken an order designed to protect her.”Prosecutor, Pam Smith, said Morement was made the subject of an indefinite restraining order in September last year which banned him from contacting his ex or going near her address. On December 23 he messaged his ex stating: “Put me back in jail all you like,” before messaging a male friend of hers warning him off from having a romantic relationship with her. He had previously breached restraining orders and at the time of the offence was on licence from prison after assaulting his ex.Steven Townley, defending, said his client and ex had been together 18 years and had eight children.There had been problems in their relationship because Morement had a bad drinking problem and they split up in July. Since then he had only seen one of the children because the others were said not to be ready to see him. In a December (sic)  he was at a party and had been drinking. 

Both these offenders were sentenced to immediate custody. The government pressurised by campaign groups and looking for further savings on its bill for prisons seeks to explain that all will be well if magistrates courts have the custody option removed bearing in mind that 4% only of cases at those courts result in a custodial sentence. I would invite any reader who supports such proposal comment on what they might consider a suitable non custodial sentence bearing in mind of course that only those in the courts at the relevant times would have heard all the proceedings.  

THE GONE MAGISTRATE

There is a prominent article in today`s Times [copied below] urging the government to allow Justices of the Peace to retire at age 75, five years older than the current age. It has been common knowledge for over a decade that the age profile of magistrates was such that a severe shortage of JPs was to be expected.  Indeed the discomfort for HMCTS is that not surprisingly many benches in addition to being short of magistrates per se will have fewer approved chairman to preside over courts.  That will lead inevitably to a need for more District Judges and Deputy DJs because as with the current shortage of nurses and GPs it will be nigh impossible to achieve the required additional numbers in the anticipated time frame.  My two predictions are that even although magistrates` training is currently nothing short of rudimentary unless government supplies more money future training standards will be below that which in the past produced lay personnel of such quality that they could preside over experienced legal practitioners with confidence notwithstanding of course the assistance of legal advisors. My other spot of crystal ball gazing leads me to conclude that owing to the aforementioned situation and desire for government control lay benches of magistrates as are now recognised will simply be allowed to wither on the vine. Already single justice procedures are active; it won`t be long before District Judges will take over most of the summary work and Justices of the Peace will be lucky if they are retained as wingers only or for other out of court processes. Thus will end over six centuries of truly justice for the people by the people.  Nobody will care; that`s the pity.

THE SACKING OF RICHARD PAGE ex J.P. PART 3

Latest news on sacked magistrate Richard Page; he is one step closer in his appeal to be re-instated. Previous posts on this topic going back some years can be seen by putting "Richard Page" into search box. 

COURT CLOSURES LATEST INFORMATION

Read very latest information from House of Commons on court closures. 

POLICE TOLERATE VIOLENCE

I would opine that in the age group over aet 50 a minority only has been the victim of violent crime.  That group would include most judges and magistrates  their familiarity with violent criminal offending resulting from their experiences in court and the anecdotal and statistical analyses that circulate within society. Until new years eve I was within that group. Whilst eating and drinking at a grand party where my table of ten was occupied by five couples who were strangers to each other I got into conversation with a young retiree from Whitby who told me his sorry tale of an event in August. He was cycling home on his just purchased  brand new state of the art lightweight racing bike when, on a narrow uphill section of a country road, he was verbally abused by an irate driver and passenger of a high powered Audi because he was holding up their progress. Eventually he was able to pull into a shallow lay by to allow the impatient driver to overtake. At the top of the hill a few minutes later he found his way barred by the passenger standing in the road screaming abuse. With no warning or provocation from the cyclist he severely assaulted him damaging his eye which required intensive hospital treatment and badly damaged his bicycle to the tune of thousands of pounds. A few days later he revisited the scene and discovered to his surprise that  the whole affair had been covered by the security cameras of a nearby house.  He contacted local police who viewed the footage and confirmed that they knew the alleged assailant but that they could not take the matter to the CPS owing to a lack of police manpower. IMHO a charge of ABH would not have seemed inappropriate. 

Today I read a headline in the Aberdeen Evening Express and other similar journals that reads "Funding cuts force police to tolerate violence, says senior officer". 

STOP BLEATING ABOUT THE MAGISTRACY`S LACK OF DIVERSITY

The 2018 judicial diversity statistics, surprise surprise, give a diversity breakdown of the judiciary as of 1 April 2018. The data shows that 55% of magistrates were female (compared to 54% in April 2017) and 12% of magistrates declared themselves as Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (compared to 11% in April 2017). Just 4% of magistrates were aged under 40, while 11% were aged 40-49, 31% were aged 50-59, and 55% were aged over 60. Latest numbers on ethnic diversity in England and Wales are as below:-

For some years the "great and the good"  plus many lesser mortals with more volume than sense have berated the magistracy as being out of touch with current mores and thus not being representative of society is unable to perform its public function notwithstanding that all magistrates on appointment take the following oath:- “I, _________ , do swear by Almighty God that I will well and truly serve our Sovereign Lady Queen Elizabeth the Second in the office of Justice of the Peace , and I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of this realm, without fear or favour, affection or ill will.” 

When magistrates are criticised a Martian observer might conclude that individually and/or collectively  they are not adhering to that oath. Others, often those leaning leftwards in their philosophical thinking, might disagree but very few if any of many lobbyists have made audited statistical results that conclusively show that the supposed lack of so called diversity is failing us as a society. Ethnic minority JPs are very well represented on the magistrates` bench. If there were such a failing it would inevitably call into question whether or not J.P.s were acting contrary to their oath of office. The arguments of "groupthink" are then raised or as a well known figure who died in 33AD is recorded as having said at the time, "They know not what they do". We are told our unconscious or subconscious prejudices are fashioning our performance and we must be re-educated out of them. The Chinese are well adept at this argument and the treatment thereof. 

Age, class and ethnic diversity are the three areas where criticism of the magistracy is concentrated.   Justices of the Peace are not paid; carefully scrutinised essential expenses are available for essential travel and subsistence.  Some employers will subsidise the system by allowing the thirteen days minimum annual sittings required to be taken without loss of earnings but many will not.  JPs in that situation must then decide if they can afford to take the loss of wages or holidays in lieu. It is therefore as clear as day that many individuals will be ruled out or will rule themselves out of applying for the magistracy.  It doesn`t take an Einstein to appreciate that only those lucky enough to have understanding employers or sufficient income will offer themselves for selection. The self employed formed about 15%-20% of my colleagues but that is only my finger in the wind estimate.  No official figures are available. Those banging on about a lack of "young magistrates" appear not to have offered sensible if any ways to persuade under thirties or even under forties candidates to apply.  I was self employed from my early twenties but could not contemplate an application much as I wanted to until I was over fifty when I was in a fortunate and comfortable financial position and I was the rule not the exception.  No government now or in future will pay magistrates a going rate which must be around £300 daily. It would ruin MOJ budgets.  More likely is the scenario of District Judges taking over the prime functions at all magistrates courts and relegating a rump of JPs to wingers for trials and in single justice procedures.   Outwith the financial barrier to younger applications is the consideration of whether the current minimum age of 18 is compatible with the wisdom needed to operate as a magistrate. It was only in 2004 that that minimum age was reduced from 27. Youth has its place of course but IMHO it was a gross mistake bowing to a spurious societal requirement that age diversity had to be a factor in making courts supposedly reflect the society in which they operate. Class references are a leftist mantra for so much of what they consider are our failings as a nation.  Nobody within a magistrates bench gives a monkey`s fart about class.  Individuals are respected for their ability to do the job whether bus driver or barrister and there was more than one of each on my bench. The class argument is typical socialist claptrap.  From the statistics above the magistracy is as ethnically diverse as a tube of smarties; all colours and tastes are there on merit.  If protagonists of "increasing diversity" are unhappy then let them spell our what their wish list is.  If quotas are mentioned then normal argument has failed.  

The rambling socialist discourse being deliberately overheated by Corbyn and his cultist following will seize upon any aspect of our society where the Tories have allowed their sometimes equally unhelpful dogma of austerity to override sense and sensibility when it comes to our justice system.  Legal Aid or more accurately the lack thereof is perhaps the most regressive measure taken in recent decades. The Tory governments since 2010 are directly responsible for this blot on the legal system. Reduced or unavailable legal aid increases the power of the state over the individual and is a direct impediment to justice being seen to be done. 

Magistrates deserve more than lip service support from those within the legal family.  Continually harping on about diversity is unhelpful if not disingenuous. 

HAPPY NEW YEAR when it comes

Peace and goodwill to all men might now be considered a hackneyed way to convey the meaning of Christmas but a Happy New Year to all is beyond misunderstanding. This retired magistrate hopes to be up and running again by the end of next week after having given thanks once more to the inventors of the amber liquid. 

THE TOAST IS THE AMBER LIQUID

If, dear reader, you`re a newcomer to this blog I hope you might return from time to time.  If you`re familiar with this site and can tolerate my sometimes unpopular themes I thank you for your persistence.  But to all who might peruse my meanderings here and @bloggingJP I wish you a very Merry Christmas and a New Year free of Brexit headlines. Since the latter is unlikely to be more than wishful thinking enjoy the amber liquid on its most appropriate time for being in the glass and not the bottle. 

THE MEANING OF THIS

I have just a brief post today.  The advertisement below from today`s edition of "Police "Professional"is for an Inspector at the MET.  If you were a white person interested in this job what would be your feelings on reading this last paragraph?

We view diversity as fundamental to our success. To tackle today’s complex policing challenges, we need a diverse workforce made up from all communities. Applications from across the community are therefore essential.[my underline]

THE CONTINUING SAGA OF RICHARD PAGE EX J.P.

My most recent post on this story was earlier this year on 15th February. For those unfamiliar with the history that post has a link to my first comments on the case a year earlier. It is a carbuncle on the face of this country`s supposed leadership in all matters legal that after almost three years Mr Page is still ascending the labyrinthine steps to a conclusion. It is a matter of some concern that at a time when HMCTS is supposedly spending a billion pounds on digitalisation of the courts` process that fundamental matters affecting our very democracy are proceeding at a snail`s pace.  It is in cases of this nature that underlying freedoms are won or lost. My opinion is that as with many supposed "changes" in legal matters the basic freedoms we have assumed as our right under the law are being salami sliced from us. The fate of Richard Page should be a concern for us all. 

HEAVEN HELP US

I have a fear of becoming boring and repetitive but when a report of yet another multiple offending scumbag paedophile being given custody suspended I hold my head in my hands. If judges cannot show the abhorrence felt by the public in their sentencing decisions they will lose public support as is happening within our political system. When politics and the law are held in contempt the day of the populist draws ever closer. Heaven help us. 

MAGISTRATES DON`T NEED COMMON SENSE

There are times when I read of sentencing practices at magistrates courts that I despair.  There is no doubt whatsoever that the law is being brought into contempt, if not literally but certainly metaphorically.  There are those who would abolish custodial sentences of less than six months.  Two responses come to mind; increase minimum sentences to six months which has no possibility of enactment or admit that the idea of public protection does  not have a place in sentencing guidelines.  Pressure upon pressure has been placed upon the courts to prevent offenders being sent to custody. There are low level recidivists who are beyond redemption under current thinking.  I have long suggested that workhouses [for various posts put workhouse in search box]  designed for this century where under lock and key inmates can be made to undergo cold turkey regimes to rid them of their drug and/or alcohol habit which drive more than 70% of crime much of which the establishment describes as low level. Such criminality affects ordinary people much more than it touches on the lives of those who make the rules.  The example of this scumbag serves to illustrate all too clearly how inadequate are some courts.  To suspend his sentence flies in the face of common sense.  Ooooops!  I forgot;  common sense is not a requirement for magistrates in this era of sensitivity and safe space political agitation. . 

JUDGING THE JUDGES (AND J.P.s)

In the last three weeks four magistrates have been disciplined by the Judicial Conduct Investigations Office.   As is always the pattern very few details are published. The whole disciplinary process is cloaked in secrecy.  This involves proceedings more suited to the 1950s than 2018.  Both from the point of the view of the public and the good name of those sanctioned there at least should be the opportunity for the latter to explain their position to a wider audience if so desired. The Law Society Gazette has a similar take on this subject in its article published at the weekend.   

LIFE SHOULD BE LIFE: END OF

When I was twelve years old I wrote an essay the subject of which was "Why I want capital punishment abolished".  Eight years later when abolition took place I was aware that all the proponents of that unique change (noting the increasing restrictions on its application) in a centuries old policy were very ready to offer their assurances that new sentencing powers would ensure that the public would be every bit as protected as pre abolition.  That was a fatuous guarantee.  However I, in harmony with a majority of the population, was prepared to be supportive on the basis of time will tell.  Well; time has told.  What ever statistics are used and/or manipulated homicides have increased considerably  in the last half century. There are occasions when a significant minority of people has a certain repugnance at the conclusions of the Parole Board.  The furore surrounding the black cab rapist who was scheduled for release a few months ago  persuaded the Parole Board to have a re think. It seems, however, that the great and the good on that Quango have once again given two fingers to public opinion.  The release has been authorised of triple child killer David McGreavy after his 45 years incarceration.  Their reasoning is that he is no longer a threat to the public. This indeed might be the case but it does not justify IMHO his release. Restricted prison accommodation or cost cannot be used as an excuse in this matter. Consideration for him in any way similarly must be ignored. His crime was of the most heinous nature.  There have been few of equal barbarity.  His punishment was life imprisonment.  If this lowest form of humanity cannot serve out his remaining days under lock and key we, the great British public, will find that our respect for the justice system will be accelerated further towards terminal decline. 

JUSTICE: THE COMING DISASTER

I`m not saying the Lord Chief Justice was slow to get off the mark and I`m not saying that I have crystal balls but sometimes I do wonder at the rate at which pennies seem to drop when justice  in all its facets indicates a sense of the direction in which it is travelling or being forced to travel by the executive.  Every year it seems the Sentencing Guidelines have become more prescriptive.  The aforementioned LCJ spoke recently on the emergence of AI in the courts.  He did not specify the Sentencing Guidelines but alluded to other aspects of what we call the justice system that could be involved.  Having retired just prior to the introduction of the digitilisation programme my opinions are based on what I read and hear; certainly a poor substitute for experience. On 7th October 2015 I concluded my post that day as follows:- "There are those who fail to see this changing face of justice and there are those who see it but don`t recognise it for what it really portends but the most disheartening factor of all is that there are many on and off the bench who do realise what the future holds but remain silent for reasons not always honourable  IMHO of course." 

Since then there have been many changes. The Single Justice Procedure has, I believe, come in for its fair share of criticism, many more magistrates courts have been closed, national and regional magistrates have been appointed by the executive presumably on the basis that their support can be shown as an indication of general support of the magistrates on the Clapham Omnibus, video courts are being utilised as if personalities have no importance and of course legal aid is virtually non existent for defendants and a financial  loss for ever increasing numbers of lawyers. On 26th October 2016 the final paragraph of that day`s post was:- "It is only a matter of a generation before such artificial intelligences become even more a part of our daily life.  Who is to say that those advances will not include interaction with current legal processes."  

Only those on the "inside" can hope to have the slightest influence on the catastrophe for individual freedom and justice which is coming our way. It seems that whilst they are in receipt of the Queen`s shilling their mouths remain closed. That, unfortunately, is the way it has always been. But perhaps there are still some who can voice their opinion without fear or favour to avert the coming disaster. 

SUPPORT JUSTICE: SUPPORT HH JUDGE MATTHEWS

The vast increase in the numbers of unrepresented defendants has been a major feature of courts, criminal, family and civil since 2010.  The many Lord Chancellors since then have attempted to deny the subsequent problems arising directly from the cause of this eruption and have sought to minimise its effects by the introduction of ever more applications of digital technology of one sort or another. There are two fundamental foundations to a justice system; equality of arms and a level playing field. . One can only guess how many injustices have been allowed to happen by the imbalance of the former. Within the magistrates` courts there are no statistics of defendants who do not present with a lawyer. The latter in recent years has been undermined by the prosecution`s inability to follow the rules on disclosure.  High profile cases especially with regard to rape have exposed this iniquity.  Whether this lack of information is by lethargy, accident or design will be known only to that small coterie in Petty France where the most hard working section is the press office. 

I retired from the bench in the early part of 2015.  Even then it was becoming apparent that in my opinion a real risk of justice not just being seen to be done but not being done per se was staring me in the face at almost every sitting. It did not happen by calculation but I realised that my manner when presiding over cases involving unrepresented defendants was changing ever so subtly. The traditional approach of seeking only "clarification" when directly questioning a witness had occasionally to be sidestepped to avoid a possible or probable miscarriage of justice. In that year I posted twice on this subject. 

Similar problems have almost certainly been presented to judges at crown court. How many have gone unreported is anyone`s guess but recently none other than a High Court judge His Honour Judge Matthews has been castigated by the Appeal Court for his inquisitorial approach to an unrepresented defendant. The Law Society Gazette has a recent report.

There is no doubt that very soon those law lords who offer guidance often only when they are retired will provoke discussion around the very basis of trial law in England. My personal justification for sometimes incurring the disapproval of legal advisors was that I would rather push the boundaries of what was hitherto acceptable practice than see a possibly innocent person convicted because s/he was unable to construct the vital question or interpret the obvious flaw which would have exposed the CPS case`s failings. HH Judge Matthews deserves the support of all those with similar opinions. 

COURT STATISTICS: NUMBERS AND YET MORE NUMBERS

For those who like their legal knowledge or some of it in numbers latest court statistics published yesterday can be accessed from here.

DISPLACEMENT ORDERS NEED DISPLACEMENT

Archimedes' principle states that the upward buoyant force that is exerted on a body immersed in a fluid, whether fully or partially submerged, is equal to the weight of the fluid that the body displaces and acts in the upward direction at the centre of mass of the displaced fluid.  The word displacement and its derivatives was for many centuries associated mainly with that fellow Archimedes. Anthropologists also found the term useful in describing ethnic or national groups who have been removed from an area and possibly replaced by others.  It is almost twenty years since the principle of displacement entered the legal domain with the introduction of ASBOs where a civil order made with criminal sanctions if breached could enable miscreants to be banned from any area the court designated.  Various other displacement orders have since been legislated eg Drinking Banning Orders followed ten years ago. Offenders were prohibited from a particular area and were pushed into adjoining towns or counties if they wanted to go to a pub.  Indeed there have been cases where a recidivist was banned from drinking in any public place in England. Such prohibition orders are just an easy way to avoid constructive answers to habitual offenders such answers to consist in varying percentages of deterrence, punishment and rehabilitation all of which are costly in comparison.

The Ministry of Justice and the Home Office has since 2010 cut to the bone the resources necessary for the justice system to function for all of us; law abiding citizens, defendants and witnesses and those who work within the whole system. This recent case is a perfect example. 

COURT TV IS OVERDUE

A literate population in times long past was considered a threat to authority. No clearer example was the advent of the printing press and the subsequent availability of the bible in the English language produced by William Tyndale in 1536A.D. whose efforts cost him his life. The first ever manuscript in English of the bible by John Wycliffe c1380A.D. led to his long dead bones being exhumed and crushed into powder on papal orders. With the advent of at least a rudimentary education for the masses in the middle and late nineteenth century the coming of mass media allowed sometimes lurid accounts of court proceedings to be brought to anybody`s attention for the price of one penny. Indeed court reports were a major feature of local newspapers until the increasing prevalence of a television set in most homes about fifty years ago gradually reduced the impact of the written word so far as news reporting was concerned.

From time to time MPs have debated televising the House of Commons. The first proceedings actually to be televised was the Debate on the Address in November 1989 and the first televised speech was by Ian Gow a Conservative opponent of the experiment. In July 1990 what had been an experiment became a permanent feature and it is now hard to imagine what the reporting of the political world was like without live T.V. from the House of Commons when it consisted of abridged newspaper reports mixed with opinions of newspaper editors and proprietors. Hansard was for the very few. There have been  limited transmissions in Scotland. With the Supreme Court being available live on Sky I hope this is just the beginning.

It is my opinion that those politicians charged with considering the possibilities of live programming of court are of the same mind set as their forebears of fifty years ago; the details might not be the same but the principles most certainly are especially at a time when this government like its predecessor is attempting to limit public access to legal proceedings in the civil courts and is in general under the blanket of reducing costs making life so difficult for defendants in some cases as to be impeding the maxim of innocent until proved guilty. Without doubt there are major areas of concern regarding witnesses but the principle of a public gallery open to all in 60” 3D and surround sound surely is the basis on which this innovation must be allowed to come to fruition however large the gallery.