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 If any comment seems submitted just to advertise a website it will not be published.
Friday 16 October 2015
51% OF NEW J.P.s ARE OVER 50
For those who rightly or wrongly consider the age profile of magistrates is too old the figures released this week on new J.P. appointments will bring little to cheer about. Over half are over the age of 50. The reason for this is really quite simple; only those who can afford even the limited time they must serve bother to apply and those of course have seen off most of their mortgage and occupy well paid positions. I am not for one minute an advocate of paying magistrates but this profile is another reason why the position of the traditional J.P. must be in jeopardy.
Thursday 15 October 2015
MAGISTRATES AGREE THAT OFFENDERS SHOULD PAY FOR JUSTICE
Yes 539: 56.15%
No 407: 42.40%
No response 14: 1.46%
My opinion for what it`s worth is that a justice system in all its multiplicity affordable, available and open to all is the second of the two pillars of our system of government, the other being defence of the realm, the provision of which government alone must take total responsibility including of course, the cost.
It seems that over half my ex colleagues are taken over by the hypnotic mantra of austerity or they do not realise the enormous philosophical and political meaning of what they voted for.
Wednesday 14 October 2015
MAGISTRATE IS "JUSTICE CHIEF"
To describe the chairman of a magistrates` bench as a "justice chief"
is poetic licence gone too far. It illustrates the dangers of some
egotistical J.P.s forgetting who they are, what their function is, to
whom they have responsibilities and to whom they are accountable. Add to that error of judgement the fact that there is no M.P. who does not wish to
be associated with efforts to prevent the closure of a court in their
constituency and one has a juicy headline. For any M.P. and this one in particular it is a golden opportunity for a few more quotable lines on his website
whatever the final decision regarding the court in question. Perhaps Mr
Chris Woodland, chairman of South East Staffordshire Magistrates,
considers the kudos of the publicity worthwhile. I suggests he reads or
reminds himself of the Media Guide for the Judiciary.
SHAMBOLIC INDICTMENT OF FAILURE
"Stranger than fiction", "beyond belief" are just two phrases commonly used to describe events outwith the imagination of most of us. To leave a convicted felon outside a court without supervision awaiting transport to prison because there was no place for him to be held securely certainly can be described by those phrases. It is nothing short of a shambolic indictment and example of all that is wrong but is happening every day in any magistrates` court somewhere in England and Wales.
Monday 12 October 2015
DEATH OF THE MAGISTRACY IS A LITTLE CLOSER
The iniquitous courts charge is finally beginning to make the news in the general press. The Times behind its paywall has an article by the long serving Frances Gibb describing how lay benches are tailoring financial outcomes where there is a sense of injustice in not so doing owing to the non means testing of the "charge". There has been no news as to whether District Judges have taken a similar route where intolerable financial burdens would have been imposed if the "rules" had been followed. I would suggest that these professional civil servants would not dare upset their paymasters by veering off the straight and narrow of the Guidelines. I think this is but a very early indication of independent J.P.s` individual defiance of government. It is unlikely there will not be more pieces of legislation during this parliament where similar considerations might apply. Such open opposition to government law making will just hasten the day when the lay bench in a courtroom will be a historical footnote.
Friday 9 October 2015
JUDGE IGNORED OFFENDER`S ABUSE
An interesting scene recently at Newcastle Crown Court where a prolific offender verbally abused an Asian Crown Court Judge led to HH stating that the foul outburst by said offender was disregarded in his sentencing decision. In my limited consideration this soft approach to a reprehensible thug is not to be applauded. Notwithstanding underlying judicial considerations to be alert to prison over population in a matter such as this in open court it does little to indicate what should be our correct reaction to such contempt for judicial authority; namely that that piece of trash should have been charged with contempt and brought before another court that very day.
REJOICE
With the prison system falling apart, a once proud and efficient
probation service on its knees, a legal defence programme breaking down,
family courts under increasing pressure from litigants in person,
undertaking civil actions beyond the financial reach of many and a
police service hardly fit for purpose we should be pleased because
Michael Gove has allowed books back into prisons and confirms a smoking ban initiated by his unlamented predecessor. So in the words of the
immortal lady, "Let us rejoice!"
Thursday 8 October 2015
18 YEAR OLD MAGISTRATE
I have looked at some of the many definitions of wisdom. Qualities variously required to achieve this noble state are knowledge, good judgement, intelligence, understanding, insight but that which seems to figure most is experience. Therefore it is completely unsurprising that in most societies past and present age and wisdom complete a perfect couplet. At the other end of the chronological spectrum youth is associated with exuberance, enthusiasm, impetuosity, idealism, impulsiveness, generosity and similar attributes. These fine human qualities were on show at the Scottish referendum last year and the cult like fascination Jeremy Corbyn appears to have for his often young supporters. The lampooning directed at young right wing supporters of the Tory Party whether in comedy fiction or real life seems to support the view that Tory voters are more mature and emphasises the incongruity of a youthful Tory in stark contrast to the respected and seemingly natural position of being a young left wing socialist. What all this has to do with a retired magistrate`s blog is the recent appointment of one Alex Hyne as England`s youngest Justice of the Peace at the tender age of 18. This young man I am sure must have many fine qualities which impressed the appointments committee; and after all he has now reached voting age, can be sent to fight for his country and can be married without parental consent but do those arguments and comparisons compensate for his lack of that indispensable requirement of experience? I would posit that at 18 lack of life knowledge is a major handicap in being able to exercise judgement over fellow citizens. Indeed even at 21 the human brain has not been completely formulated.
The lowering of age related requirements is paying lip service to a philosophy originated in the 1960s of equality for almost anything or anybody per se without any regard to any other qualification. The fact that the last census equated being a Jedi Knight to being a Catholic, or Jew or Sikh or Hindu or Moslem insofar as it was considered a religion shows how far we have travelled down this particular road to perdition. I wish this young person nothing but good fortune but I fear his mentor and other bench colleagues will have their good natures put under some unnecessary strain to force feed him that wisdom which his youth must sorely lack.
The lowering of age related requirements is paying lip service to a philosophy originated in the 1960s of equality for almost anything or anybody per se without any regard to any other qualification. The fact that the last census equated being a Jedi Knight to being a Catholic, or Jew or Sikh or Hindu or Moslem insofar as it was considered a religion shows how far we have travelled down this particular road to perdition. I wish this young person nothing but good fortune but I fear his mentor and other bench colleagues will have their good natures put under some unnecessary strain to force feed him that wisdom which his youth must sorely lack.
Wednesday 7 October 2015
SENTENCING GUIDELINES TOMORROW or COMPUTER SAYS NO
Prior to Sentencing Guidelines being introduced for the first time into English sentencing practices in 2003 officials at the time took particular note of the guidelines in the American state of Michigan.For some years judges there had been using a system of points such points being allocated to various factors to be considered in reaching the final sentence. In England in my early days on the bench we used what was described as structured decision making; we considered the factors involved in the offence and offender and built up a sentence which would correspond to these factors and where necessary add considerations based upon local knowledge and concerns. In hindsight I can now see that although the purpose of the first Guidelines was ostensibly to eliminate what was known in the NHS as a "post code lottery" where there was inequality of treatments and outcomes with the justice system it seems to be that elimination of local variables was the purpose thus facilitating a system of "national" as opposed to the local justice espoused by generations of Lord Chancellors and M.P.s. Even today the cry of "save our local court" or "we must not lose local justice" rings loud from Westminster and local print media. It is a chimera. Increasing appointments of District Judges[M.C.] and DDJs were not based on their local knowledge or associations. True local justice by local magistrates was not fully under the control of the Ministry of Justice and that for government was no longer tenable. Local Magistrates` Courts` Committees were abolished in the name of greater efficiency.........it`s always that reason that`s given. The reality is that centralisation offers greater control. A full history of this development is on Wikipedia.
The new Sentencing Guideline on Theft to be implemented in February next year has taken itself to new heights of "sentence by numbers". In practical terms it is barely a whisper away from Michigan`s points system. Indeed in my inexpert opinion it lends itself to total digitisation; I doubt any competent programmer would find difficulty in producing a logarithm to give a bench or D.J. instant outcomes at the press of a couple of keys on the keyboard.
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.
The new Sentencing Guideline on Theft to be implemented in February next year has taken itself to new heights of "sentence by numbers". In practical terms it is barely a whisper away from Michigan`s points system. Indeed in my inexpert opinion it lends itself to total digitisation; I doubt any competent programmer would find difficulty in producing a logarithm to give a bench or D.J. instant outcomes at the press of a couple of keys on the keyboard.
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.
Monday 5 October 2015
DO THE STABLES OF THE MAGISTRATES ASSOCIATION NEED A HERACLES?
Some readers might have noticed over the months that I am not an avid supporter of the Magistrates Association. There are many reasons why I resigned from that organisation some years after appointment to the bench but this is not a post to rethink previous actions. Rather it is to demonstrate the limited and downright misleading thinking processes of those at the top of that organisation and of equal importance the withholding of important information on how it intends to cover the hole in its finances.
Currently we are ruled by a Conservative government with an overall majority in parliament of twelve seats. Owing to the form of our electoral system that majority was gained by the Tories winning 36.9% of the vote where the turnout was 66.1% of those on the register. Uncomplicated arithmetic shows that of those on that electoral roll 24.9% voted Tory. That form of simple calculation has been used in the last couple of weeks to justify the new leader of the Labour Party`s assertion that he has a mandate for change and to justify his support for politics to be taken to the streets. David Cameron is also using similar logic to restrict the terms under which trade unions can lawfully call their members out on strike. This in a nation when a referendum took place in 2011 on changing to an electoral system of proportional representation where the turn out was only 41% and the No vote was 67.9% indicating that only 27.8% of the eligible voting population was in agreement. It seems that the chairman of the Magistrates Association in the June-July *issue of its in house magazine The Magistrate is using the same argument as indicated above that his efforts are indeed supported by its members depending of course on which side the preferred outcome suits the argument. He argues initially that because 75% of magistrates belong to the M.A. an undisclosed sample of their views supports his actions. To bolster his argument that he is representative of J.P.s he derides the opinions of the 25% of non members disregarding the simple fact that they conscientiously refused to join. Compare this with the apathy of many members.
*As your chairman I am but a mouthpiece for the aggregated views of the magistracy. There are those who still repeat the mantra that, because not every magistrate is a member we do not represent the magistracy. Sorry but that is rubbish. A view gained from sampling 75% of magistrates is not going to change significantly, if we also sample the other 25%. After all, we have just voted in a government with well under 40% of the population who bothered to turn out to vote, and that is being called a decisive victory.
I suppose in what we describe as a democratic society it is up to anybody to use real numbers in the way in which they consider their arguments best made. In advertising such practices are subject to authority. In many other situations it is a case of caveat emptor.
On 02/06/2015 I posted on the fact that the M.A. was actively soliciting funds from Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). Defence of this little publicised activity reeks of disingenuity by its proponents. In the August-September issue of The Magistrate pp8&9 there is a lengthy **article part copied below on how the Association is being funded and where there might be avenues to obtaining increased income. Nowhere is there mention of contributions, actual or in the process of negotiation, by CRCs. I would opine that keeping secret such a change of fundraising activity where sentencers receive income from those being paid to carry out those sentencers` sentencing is nothing short of a scandal yet to be uncovered.
**Funding core activities So how are we going to fund our Policy and Research activities over the forthcoming years? Members have told us that, of all the work we do, influencing the agenda is valued most highly. However, success in influencing policy has no impact on income generation and so this work must be funded in other ways.One of the ways of achieving this could be if all members, who want this invaluable work to continue and grow, would consider increasing their annual donation or indeed adding to or replacing it with a monthly donation of say £5 or £10, which, of course, is still eligible for Gift Aid. Such increased donations will help but are unlikely to be sufficient to fund everything that needs to be achieved and so other sources of funds are needed as well. Here are some ideas where each of you can help ensure that the MA continues to have sufficient funding to continue all of the work that you wish it to undertake on your behalf:
In the wider scheme of things such apparent petty malfeasance or sins of omission count for very little. Within the organisation puporting to represent the junior judiciary which as a charity must function for the public good and whose members` activities private as well as public must be above reproach I would argue that the stables are not as clean as they should be.
Currently we are ruled by a Conservative government with an overall majority in parliament of twelve seats. Owing to the form of our electoral system that majority was gained by the Tories winning 36.9% of the vote where the turnout was 66.1% of those on the register. Uncomplicated arithmetic shows that of those on that electoral roll 24.9% voted Tory. That form of simple calculation has been used in the last couple of weeks to justify the new leader of the Labour Party`s assertion that he has a mandate for change and to justify his support for politics to be taken to the streets. David Cameron is also using similar logic to restrict the terms under which trade unions can lawfully call their members out on strike. This in a nation when a referendum took place in 2011 on changing to an electoral system of proportional representation where the turn out was only 41% and the No vote was 67.9% indicating that only 27.8% of the eligible voting population was in agreement. It seems that the chairman of the Magistrates Association in the June-July *issue of its in house magazine The Magistrate is using the same argument as indicated above that his efforts are indeed supported by its members depending of course on which side the preferred outcome suits the argument. He argues initially that because 75% of magistrates belong to the M.A. an undisclosed sample of their views supports his actions. To bolster his argument that he is representative of J.P.s he derides the opinions of the 25% of non members disregarding the simple fact that they conscientiously refused to join. Compare this with the apathy of many members.
*As your chairman I am but a mouthpiece for the aggregated views of the magistracy. There are those who still repeat the mantra that, because not every magistrate is a member we do not represent the magistracy. Sorry but that is rubbish. A view gained from sampling 75% of magistrates is not going to change significantly, if we also sample the other 25%. After all, we have just voted in a government with well under 40% of the population who bothered to turn out to vote, and that is being called a decisive victory.
I suppose in what we describe as a democratic society it is up to anybody to use real numbers in the way in which they consider their arguments best made. In advertising such practices are subject to authority. In many other situations it is a case of caveat emptor.
On 02/06/2015 I posted on the fact that the M.A. was actively soliciting funds from Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs). Defence of this little publicised activity reeks of disingenuity by its proponents. In the August-September issue of The Magistrate pp8&9 there is a lengthy **article part copied below on how the Association is being funded and where there might be avenues to obtaining increased income. Nowhere is there mention of contributions, actual or in the process of negotiation, by CRCs. I would opine that keeping secret such a change of fundraising activity where sentencers receive income from those being paid to carry out those sentencers` sentencing is nothing short of a scandal yet to be uncovered.
**Funding core activities So how are we going to fund our Policy and Research activities over the forthcoming years? Members have told us that, of all the work we do, influencing the agenda is valued most highly. However, success in influencing policy has no impact on income generation and so this work must be funded in other ways.One of the ways of achieving this could be if all members, who want this invaluable work to continue and grow, would consider increasing their annual donation or indeed adding to or replacing it with a monthly donation of say £5 or £10, which, of course, is still eligible for Gift Aid. Such increased donations will help but are unlikely to be sufficient to fund everything that needs to be achieved and so other sources of funds are needed as well. Here are some ideas where each of you can help ensure that the MA continues to have sufficient funding to continue all of the work that you wish it to undertake on your behalf:
■
Around 16% of our annual members have not signed up to enable us to receive Gift Aid on their donations. Remember for every £1 donated to the MA we can claim 25p from the Government as Gift Aid, so long as the donor is a UK income tax payer and has completed the Gift Aid form, which our membership department will very happily supply. If all annual members signed up to Gift Aid our income would increase by at least £20,000.
■
Many of our life members have obtained the bargain of the century by making a one-off payment many years ago. Perhaps they would consider making a regular or one-off donation.
■
Many benches are now recruiting new magistrates after some years of low recruitment. We should all make efforts to ensure that we sign up as many of these new JPs as possible, whilst, of course, not forgetting to persuade any existing non-member magistrates to help the magistracy overall by becoming a member of the Association. It is never too late to join!
■
We are undertaking a programme to recruit more individual Associate members. Associates are not JPs, but people who have an interest in the magistracy. They receive all the benefits of being a member, but are unable to vote in any of our elections.
■
We are always pleased to accept small regular or irregular monthly or quarterly donations, as well as any legacies or other one-off donations, just as other charities do
In the wider scheme of things such apparent petty malfeasance or sins of omission count for very little. Within the organisation puporting to represent the junior judiciary which as a charity must function for the public good and whose members` activities private as well as public must be above reproach I would argue that the stables are not as clean as they should be.
Friday 2 October 2015
LORD THOMAS SPEAKS OUT
I have mentioned here from time to time that IMHO the apparent failings of senior judiciary to speak out on the undermining of our justice system since 2010 whilst perhaps paying lip service to constitutional niceties does nothing to protect individual liberties from the overwhelming power of government in the form of justice for all in the courts. That justice for all ranges from treatment of unrepresented defendants in magistrates` courts to limits on judicial review.
Lord Chief Justice Thomas in a speech on September 15th has entered the public arena with some force. The latter part of his remarks, it is to be hoped, will be noted carefully and thoughtfully by those currently in control who espouse "free at the point of use" for the NHS but "users must pay" as far as justice is concerned.
Lord Chief Justice Thomas in a speech on September 15th has entered the public arena with some force. The latter part of his remarks, it is to be hoped, will be noted carefully and thoughtfully by those currently in control who espouse "free at the point of use" for the NHS but "users must pay" as far as justice is concerned.
Thursday 1 October 2015
YOU COULDN`T MAKE IT UP
Joined up government is a well used phrase. It is simple and self explanatory and more often than not it isn`t achieved. Smoke gets in your eyes and more significantly although less lyrically it gets in your lungs. There is no doubt at all that children can be seriously affected by second hand smoke whether in cars or the living room. Living rooms are private. Cars drive on public roads so today the government announces with pride that it will be illegal for a smoker to light up in a vehicle where there is also sitting an under eighteen year old. A laudable attempt one might think to protect these juveniles until it comes to policing the miscreants. Police have said they won`t be doing so because, not unreasonably they argue, they have more important matters to pursue eg burglars and other assorted individuals intent on doing harm to people or property and the resources to satisfy these priorities have been cut to the bone and often through the bone.
"Yes Prime Minister" should have been viewed by the new Labour leader for inspiration re Trident. This latest carry on must be on the ideas short list if there is another series of "The Thick Of It". You couldn`t make it up.
"Yes Prime Minister" should have been viewed by the new Labour leader for inspiration re Trident. This latest carry on must be on the ideas short list if there is another series of "The Thick Of It". You couldn`t make it up.
Wednesday 30 September 2015
BUY TWO MET POLICE AND GET TWO FREE (OFFER ONLY VALID IN HAMPSTEAD)
I recollect many years ago taking a tourist trip in a minibus around Beverly Hills. The houses of the movie stars were, to use my teenage son`s description; awesome. But my J.P.`s eye alighted as much on the number of "ordinary" houses where a signboard was centrally placed with the words "ARMED RESPONSE PATROLS". My innocent mind metaphorically sighed inwardly at what I perceived was the lowly state American law enforcement must have reached in inverse proportion to the paranoia of rich Californians. Today I read about the rich residents of Hampstead in London contemplating renting their very own dedicated police officers to do what the Metropolitan Police apparently fails to do: namely patrol to a degree which gives confidence to the local population that life and property are to some degree protected from a breach of the peace which is, after all, the prime purpose of any police force.
Politically and philosophically I am off the Corbynista spectrum but there is just so much cutting of a nation`s total police, security and justice system budget that can be made without everything imploding. The reality is that until the unsupportable concept of a "free" NHS providing the best health care for an ever increasing and ageing population is confronted head on with the fact that "free" at the point of use means inevitably a rationing of said healthcare the position will be the same as in the former Soviet Union where bread was so cheap it was affordable by all but it was rationed to reduce demand. The residents of Frognal and Fitzjohns and Hampstead Town wards are discovering right now that there is a point where a limit has been reached.
Politically and philosophically I am off the Corbynista spectrum but there is just so much cutting of a nation`s total police, security and justice system budget that can be made without everything imploding. The reality is that until the unsupportable concept of a "free" NHS providing the best health care for an ever increasing and ageing population is confronted head on with the fact that "free" at the point of use means inevitably a rationing of said healthcare the position will be the same as in the former Soviet Union where bread was so cheap it was affordable by all but it was rationed to reduce demand. The residents of Frognal and Fitzjohns and Hampstead Town wards are discovering right now that there is a point where a limit has been reached.
Tuesday 29 September 2015
SOMETHING ROTTEN IN THE HARD LEFT
Imagine you`re sitting in a cafe/bistro in an inner city suburb one evening and a mob of several hundred mainly teenagers both black and white waving flaming torches marches down the street threatening to break the cafe`s windows where you`re sitting enjoying a dinner out. Their target is the very place you`ve chosen to spend some of your hard earned money. You would expect the police to arrive swiftly in overwhelming numbers to protect life and property. The following day you would also expect to read that dozens of protesters had been arrested on charges ranging from criminal damage to affray. If the above scenario had taken place in an "improving " area of East London your expectations would have failed to be realised. Virtually every inner city area of London has either been gentrified or is on the horizon so to be. From Notting Hill in the 60s where signs on slum properties for rent read, "NO DOGS, NO IRISH, NO BLACKS" to Shorerditch today via Crouch End in the north to Shepherds Bush in the west not forgetting Elephant and Battersea in the south, shopping parades have changed from the provision of services for poorer working and non working families to those catering for the more exotic tastes of an aspiring middle class eschewing the attractions of a three bed semi in MetroLand in preference for a two bedroom converted flat at a cost of half a million pounds. And in Shoreditch last Saturday after an event which would have been to
say the least decidedly unpleasant for those in the cafe or nearby only
one person so far has been arrested by those brave men in Met Police
blue and that is on suspicion of causing criminal damage.
The protesters of a hard left variety also managed to encapsulate the anti semitism which has become de rigueur of late amongst the comrades in their Facebook page advertising the event, " Our communities are being ripped apart - by Russian oligarchs, Saudi Sheiks, Israeli scumbag property developers," where it is considered that insults to "Israelis" in this context of supposed gentrification can usefully take the place of "Jews" without a breach of legislation on race relations.
There is definitely something still very rotten in the state of the Met. but there is something decidedly evil in the Left`s resurrection of the oldest virus.
The protesters of a hard left variety also managed to encapsulate the anti semitism which has become de rigueur of late amongst the comrades in their Facebook page advertising the event, " Our communities are being ripped apart - by Russian oligarchs, Saudi Sheiks, Israeli scumbag property developers," where it is considered that insults to "Israelis" in this context of supposed gentrification can usefully take the place of "Jews" without a breach of legislation on race relations.
There is definitely something still very rotten in the state of the Met. but there is something decidedly evil in the Left`s resurrection of the oldest virus.
Monday 28 September 2015
MAGISTRATES` THOUGHTS ON UNREPRESENTED DEFENDANTS
It is generally accepted that
magistrates` courts came into being in 1285, during the reign of Edward I, when
‘good and lawful men’ were commissioned to keep the King’s peace. The title
Justice of the Peace (J.P.) first appeared in 1361, in the reign of Edward III.
As the office was unpaid only those with independent wealth could be appointed. Until the turn of this century applicants had
to declare their political affiliation before their applications would be
considered. Prior to 2003 there was a great deal of truly local control of
individual magistrates` courts.
With major changes in society since 1997;
reduction in crime, increase in out of court disposals, mass immigration,
increases in legislation and governments` increasing desire to exercise
control, units of governance increased
in size eg many smaller London boroughs were abolished and absorbed into larger
entities with populations the size of cities such as Bristol. Courts were no exception to this big is best
philosophy. With the formation of Her
Majesty`s Courts and Tribunals Service in 2011 central government has overall
control of the whole courts` process.
The last fifteen years have seen a
gradual erosion of the powers of magistrates` benches over their members and
behind the scenes court processes. Her
Majesty`s Courts and Tribunal Service has arguably created powers for itself
not envisaged by those who set these changes in motion. Whilst the number of J.P.s has fallen by
almost a third over this period of falling numbers of cases coming to
court the same period has seen the
number of full time District Judges sitting alone rising from below 100 to 139 assisted by 154
part time Deputy District Judges. The
numbers of District Judges (and D.D.J.s)
have increased as a direct result of government policies. It is
reasonable to ask oneself why. It cannot
be purely on cost although if their having a qualified legal clerk for
assistance were abolished the cost difference would be a close run thing
allowing for J.P.s expenses. It cannot
be that increasing court time is required.
The last decade has seen the number of lay magistrates reduced from
c30,000 to c 23,000. The only logical conclusion is that by having the lower
courts under the control of salaried civil servants they become more amenable
to central control. Those more expert
than I in the manipulation of statistics have suggested that converting the
Deputies to full time D.J.s would enable a government to remove the lay Justice
of the Peace from the criminal court altogether replacing him/her with a single
arbiter of law, fact finding and sentencing
thus allowing full - on control of the total courts process by
civil servants beholden to government for their stipend. It is virtually beyond argument that this is
indeed what happened after the riots of 2011.
I personally experienced pressure from senior officials to send where
lawful a related matter at that time to
crown court as District Judges were instructed to do notwithstanding whether or
not it had passed the required seriousness test. My colleagues and I at the time declined such
pressure.
There is no doubt that in their quest to
pursue the concept of restorative justice,
the proliferation of out of court disposals, the pressure to reduce
custodial sentencing and the virtual balancing of costs between J.P.s and an
arguably more efficient and cost
effective professional judiciary there are politicians all too willing to heed
the voices of pressure groups to remove the lay magistracy from the courtrooms
of England and Wales. Recent
legislative changes, by the coalition and the current government, have seen the
resignation of perhaps thirty J.P.s........statistics are impossible to
find. Imposition of taxes unrelated to
income termed “victim surcharge” on convicted offenders in addition to costs,
fines, community requirements and custodial sentences were greeted with dismay
by most of my ex colleagues. Recently
announced additional such taxation known as the Criminal Court Charge will
almost certainly accelerate the philosophical distance between magistrates and
government leading inevitably to
more resignations especially from the most senior cohort of J.P.s.
In the light of the aforementioned
history current pressures on the magistracy are beginning to take a new form;
namely is it time for its abolition?
Whilst there are few who would raise their head above the parapet to put
their case the alleged poor quality of training received by magistrates is
being used as a convenient stick with which to beat them. The Howard League for Penal Reform and
Transform Justice are just two of the pressure groups seeking major changes to
the training programmes currently offered to J.P.s. However in any discussion on magistrates` own
opinions of their activities and
competence within the courts in which they sit there is a dearth of
knowledge. The Magistrates Association is
held in such low esteem that its efforts to canvass opinion can be virtually
discounted. For that reason I decided to
canvass opinions held by members of my former bench myself on the vexed and
troubling subject of unrepresented defendants whose presence in court has been
brought into the spotlight by the reducing availability of legal aid. For my sample I chose colleagues I knew to
be forthright and logical in their thinking and with at least five years
experience. Their number did not exceed
ten. This information gathering exercise
is not meant to be a statistical analysis of the thought processes of some
J.P.s; it is merely the gathering together and assembly of opinion during
friendly conversation with former colleagues. The following is an account of
their views.
Considering unrepresented defendants it
was apparent that care must be taken to distinguish between two very different
stages of the justice system; namely first appearances at magistrates` court and
at trial for a summary or either way offence.
There did not seem to be more such appearances at first listings than
prior to the activation of the new process of anticipated guilty or not guilty
pleas although there was some dissent amongst interviewees. Those unrepresented were generally in such a
position through lack of means, unawareness of seriousness and/or ignorance of
proceedings. Those factors were no
different now than they had always been. The turmoil over legal aid contracts
had not so far had any detrimental effect on the availability of representation
at remand courts. Defendants, it was considered, still enjoyed the benefit of
legal advice from a duty solicitor if they took advantage of that facility. However what came through loud and clear was
the awareness that defendants might feel
pressurised to plead guilty at this early stage. Most interviewees were of the opinion that before
any sitting, written information should be handed to each defendant by the
usher explaining procedures and in
particular the consequences of entering an anticipated plea whatever its
nature. One dissenter suggested that those offering an
early guilty anticipated plea could be formally processed at the police station
by video link from the court. All were concerned by the recently imposed
Courts Charge. The financial burden by
its imposition without means testing on those found guilty after trial gave
rise to a fear that additional equivocal
guilty pleas might be offered and it was incumbent upon bench chairmen to be prepared to question the
validity of any such plea where that might arise. For either way offences and defendants
eschewing legal assistance it was vital that bench chairmen be able to assist
legal advisors in ensuring understanding of the consequences of any decision. It was
agreed that for motoring offences representation was not the norm unless a
conviction meant the offender had become a totter. It was thought that some unrepresented defendants
do not realise the consequences of some motoring offences eg driving without
due care or s.172 failure to provide identification of driver. There was support for sending information of
the maximum penalty for a guilty plea or being found guilty of such offences
along with the court summons. There was
agreement that generally the quality of
CPS representation was questionable.
With many being agents with no authority to “take a view” when multiple
charges were involved outcomes could differ from defendant to defendant
apparently unfairly. It was pointed out
by a chairman that no training has been offered to bench chairmen in
preparation for a probable increase in unrepresented defendants and the
consequences for all within the system.
My interviews regarding trials of
unrepresented defendants produced broad agreement. There was an expectation of increased time
being required especially if the non representation had not been endorsed on
the preparation for trial form. There
was with only a single dissenter a belief that the bench chairman will
inevitably need to become more inquisitorial there being in those circumstances
no more a level playing field. Previous
practice has been that the bench was limited in its questioning of a witness to
“seeking clarification” of a topic previously given in evidence. It was felt now that that limitation with
litigants in person was not conducive to justice being done and being seen to
be done. The message seemed to be that
seeking the truth had to be a priority where without equality of arms there was
risk of miscarriage of justice. Most of
the interviewees told me there was not 100% confidence in legal advisors being
able to assist those defendants to a satisfactory level. A very
experienced chairman suggested that the Courts Charge could be reduced for
unrepresented defendants convicted after trial.
There were some topics where there was general agreement. Defendants should be provided with suitable
explanatory literature with the summons and upon entry to the courthouse prior
to their appearance in the courtroom.
Additional time must be allocated at trial. Benches must be on their guard against
possible miscarriages of justice and be prepared to take a more inquisitorial
attitude to witnesses than has hitherto been allowed by legal advisors whose
own performances were thought to be variable.
Indeed there was a majority view that increasing numbers of
unrepresented defendants could
fundamentally alter the centuries old tradition of “equality of arms” or the
“level playing field” so beloved by proponents of the English adversarial
tradition of justice. It therefore might
be concluded that the old approach of a bench`s questioning of a witness by
first stating, “Just to clarify a point Mr X..........” and hesitating to tread
new ground might slowly give way to the opening of a new topic. Those with that opinion felt getting at the
truth in such circumstances justified the change of approach. A minority was equally strong in its
opposition to such changes.
My personal opinion for what it`s worth
is that the provision of literature, sent
with summons and supplied at remand
courts, that explains procedures and consequences of plea and allocation is
long overdue. In the foreseeable future with
anticipated increases in litigants in person it would be criminal not to so
do. Magistrates must guard against
possible miscarriages of justice by omission and if that requires a more
inquisitorial approach so be it.
This kind of research into the workings
of magistrates` benches is long overdue. I look forward to an independent review
of what does go on in the retiring room.
Thursday 24 September 2015
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT IN NUMBERS
In his memoirs published five years ago Tony Blair described bringing in the Freedom of Information Act as the worst thing his government did in office. Not unnaturally that statement upset millions of people. Nevertheless that admission alone has a corollary; the FOI is now an indispensable tool for many this blogger included. It is hard to believe that any future government would do likewise just as it is hard to believe how as a country where there still is a semblance of free speech we could function now without the facility it offers. The story in numbers is here.
LEGAL AID STATISTICS
It`s statistics time again for legal aid provision. No doubt the broadsheets and others will decipher the numbers and impart their individual spin but for those of a numerical bent the figures are here.
Wednesday 23 September 2015
LEGAL STRAIGHT TALKING
Two widely respected individuals have recently expressed their opinions on matters legal one of which will be refreshing for the majority involved in our courts` system and the other is already setting the feminist cat amongst the male pigeons.
Jushua Rozenberg whose comments for years have resonated with many including this blogger writing in the Law Society Gazette places his well polished boot straight into the arse of the unlamented Lord Chancellor of the coalition Chris Grayling. His closing paragraph copied below* follows from a statement from Shailesh Vara Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice {21/09/2015} that he sees no significance in the numbers of J.P.s thought to have resigned...also copied below**.
* "Gove may not be too worried by reports that more than 50 magistrates have resigned over the charge. But what should concern him is that this is another ineffective Grayling legacy that is wrong in principle and costly in practice."
** "There is no evidence that magistrates are resigning in greater numbers this year than in previous years."
It really is about time that some senior judicial voices made themselves publicly heard on this subject.
When differences between the sexes are aired in any observation concerning however vaguely the matter of employment or capability tongues previously blunted suddenly find their sharp edge. Linkedin provided such an entertaining scene just a couple of weeks ago. This week no less than Supreme Court Judge Lord Sumption offered his opinion loud and clear in public that the rush for gender equality in the senior judiciary could cause existential problems for our justice system. The comments following the Law Society Gazette report are as thought provoking as his lordship`s original observations. Perhaps he will be the voice of reason on the topic above mentioned if and when he again uses his post as a pulpit for debate.
Jushua Rozenberg whose comments for years have resonated with many including this blogger writing in the Law Society Gazette places his well polished boot straight into the arse of the unlamented Lord Chancellor of the coalition Chris Grayling. His closing paragraph copied below* follows from a statement from Shailesh Vara Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice {21/09/2015} that he sees no significance in the numbers of J.P.s thought to have resigned...also copied below**.
* "Gove may not be too worried by reports that more than 50 magistrates have resigned over the charge. But what should concern him is that this is another ineffective Grayling legacy that is wrong in principle and costly in practice."
** "There is no evidence that magistrates are resigning in greater numbers this year than in previous years."
It really is about time that some senior judicial voices made themselves publicly heard on this subject.
When differences between the sexes are aired in any observation concerning however vaguely the matter of employment or capability tongues previously blunted suddenly find their sharp edge. Linkedin provided such an entertaining scene just a couple of weeks ago. This week no less than Supreme Court Judge Lord Sumption offered his opinion loud and clear in public that the rush for gender equality in the senior judiciary could cause existential problems for our justice system. The comments following the Law Society Gazette report are as thought provoking as his lordship`s original observations. Perhaps he will be the voice of reason on the topic above mentioned if and when he again uses his post as a pulpit for debate.
Monday 21 September 2015
LOCAL JUSTICE:NATIONAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES??!!
A mantra of the Magistrates Association and M.P.s when it suits their "can`t lose" support for a constituency court to be under threat of closure is "local justice for local people". Whilst the pithy phrase might suit a hustings or a sub editor on the Round the Corner Gazette the truth is that since local Magistrates` Courts Committees were abolished in 2003 to be replaced by Her Majesty`s Court Service in 2005 and subsequently merged with the Tribunals Service in 2011 to become Her Majesty`s Courts and Tribunal Service the term local is of historical interest only. The increasing numbers of District Judges (MC) appointed without reference to their previous or original geographical location is further evidence that justice is national. Sentencing Guidelines introduced in 2003 confirmed that courts were no longer to apply their own previously considered structured sentencing options which as I recall were hammered into us at training sessions and appraisals. The Guidelines, we were told, were not to be considered straightjackets and could be disregarded provided a pronouncement was made to that effect in open court: so much for the theory. It became apparent to me when sitting with new magistrates over the last few years that they were fearful when making sentencing decisions of not following the Guidelines as if in so doing they were on the road to perdition. My impression was that initial training heavily accentuates the need to forget creativeness in sentencing and use the Guidelines as one would use a holy book.
With the government`s programme of court closures far from complete it is about time that those in opposition to closures in their neighbourhood should realise that "local" to the MOJ is water off a duck`s back. Total control nationwide is happening as it is in other walks of daily life. The fact that there is now a coterie of Marxists of varying ideologies on the House of Commons front bench where there is, despite the outward appearances, a crave to nationalise everything that moves, has brought us a tiny step closer to the day when whatever Justices of the Peace do or are seen to be doing it will not be in a courtroom.
With the government`s programme of court closures far from complete it is about time that those in opposition to closures in their neighbourhood should realise that "local" to the MOJ is water off a duck`s back. Total control nationwide is happening as it is in other walks of daily life. The fact that there is now a coterie of Marxists of varying ideologies on the House of Commons front bench where there is, despite the outward appearances, a crave to nationalise everything that moves, has brought us a tiny step closer to the day when whatever Justices of the Peace do or are seen to be doing it will not be in a courtroom.
Sunday 20 September 2015
OBFUSCATION OR ABRACADABRA AT MOJ
Shailesh Vara The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice
Utilisation rates for Hartlepool, Teesside and England and Wales are provided below:
This shows that nationally Magistrates’ Courts are used for less than half of their available hearing time.
The above was published September 18th but the numbers cannot be taken seriously. The definition of "utilsation rate" of magistrates` courts is as obscure as the definition of "abracadabra" notwithstanding the reasons for their apparent inefficiency which are often as a result of failing performances of government`s own agencies; i.e. HMCTS, CPS and Victim Support. Once again the only magic here is MOJ spin.
Property Name | 2010-11 | 2011-12 | 2012-13 | 2013-14 | 2014-15 |
Hartlepool Magistrates’ Court and County Court | 70% | 43% | 50% | 44% | 49% |
Teesside Magistrates’ Court | 78% | 76% | 80% | 68% | 58% |
England and Wales Magistrates' Court average | 59% | 63% | 63% | 51% | 46% |
The above was published September 18th but the numbers cannot be taken seriously. The definition of "utilsation rate" of magistrates` courts is as obscure as the definition of "abracadabra" notwithstanding the reasons for their apparent inefficiency which are often as a result of failing performances of government`s own agencies; i.e. HMCTS, CPS and Victim Support. Once again the only magic here is MOJ spin.
Friday 18 September 2015
DANGEROUS DOGS
The Dangerous Dogs Acts
of 1871 and 1991 supplemented by the Animal Welfare Act of 2006 form
the basis of most prosecutions dealing with problems caused by man`s best friend. During my whole time on the bench I don`t think I sat on
more than three such matters which more or less confirms the rarity of
such prosecutions. Currently under UK law one dog attacking another
is not classed as a crime - but treated as a civil matter. Police can
only step in and bring a prosecution if a dog attacks a person. This analysis
might provide interesting reading for those who seek to delve into how
laws are changed. Ten defendants were proceeded against at magistrates' courts, and five were found guilty at all courts of offences related to dog fighting in England and Wales, in 2014. The recording and analysis of these types of offences and their consequences seems less than wholly transparent which for much of government is nothing new.
Thursday 17 September 2015
MAGISTRATES` COURTS WILL BE CLOSED! THE END
Once again that invaluable processor of events in parliament They Work For You has provided information from exchanges in that august but broken down place which in their own way are a microcosm of what some would show is the essence of our democracy and others the need for a complete change of approach.
The arguments for the destruction of the magistrates` courts system......and there is no other term that could be more accurately descriptive........are neatly laid out in yesterday`s debate in Westminster Hall on the situation of such courts in Suffolk. All the spurious assertions that technology is the answer to all the criticisms are clearly recited. No amount of persuasion is going to alter the final result.
The arguments for the destruction of the magistrates` courts system......and there is no other term that could be more accurately descriptive........are neatly laid out in yesterday`s debate in Westminster Hall on the situation of such courts in Suffolk. All the spurious assertions that technology is the answer to all the criticisms are clearly recited. No amount of persuasion is going to alter the final result.
Wednesday 16 September 2015
COURTS` PERFORMANCE STATISTICS
The MOJ`s latest trial statistics are now available courtesy of They Work For You. I`ve posted here at least twice before on this subject. The numbers certainly did not make comfortable reading then and don`t do so now although perhaps those at Petty France with not much to do will collate some figures to tell us how the situation has improved. I don`t have the time or inclination today to use my calculator.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)