ELECTION OF BENCH TRAINING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 25. Nov. 2010. – 14:13:44

The Magistracy is trumpeted as being a uniquely English institution allowing local justice to be dispensed by local people. With certain caveats I would agree. The Scottish and Irish versions are not quite the same. Individual benches must follow strict guidelines in performing some duties and are most locally idiosyncratic in others. Individual benches control their own rota, ideally placing mixed sex and ethnic benches where possible. Rota systems are very variable with some benches following outdated local procedures that should have gone out with ladies` compulsory hats and cigarette holders de rigueur in the retiring room whilst others perform this vital function using common sense and the latest soft ware. 

One vital aspect of bench representation is the Bench Training and Development Committee. This can be appointed internally or have individuals elected annually. But here`s the b u t………….if an elective committee only those attending the annual election meeting can vote. No postal or proxy voting is allowed. At my bench about one third of members turn up………of course not always the same third. To allow change in the voting system or to allow benches to alter their own voting procedures government would have to table a statutory instrument. Perhaps there is an organisation of magistrates which might consider lobbying for this extension of democracy or is that akin to asking the pot to call the kettle black?

GO ORDERS

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 25. Nov. 2010. – 09:45:38

In various forms domestic violence appears to have occurred as a primary or secondary topic here on more occasions than I had anticipated. Perhaps the subject is occupying in general more column inches or sound bytes [bites?] than other offences dealt with by magistrates. Perhaps its prevalence is owing to the increasingly authoritarian and extra judicial disposals applied for by prosecutors eg restraining orders even where there has been no conviction. Non judicial approaches to unconvicted suspects in alleged domestic violent incidents have today been reinforced by additional police powers when investigating such incidents.

In the three designated pilot areas Greater Manchester, Wiltshire and West Mercia police will be empowered to order a suspect to leave the family home for forty eight hours on the say so of an officer of Superintendant rank. It will be commonly called a go order. After that period, for the order to continue the authority must come from the magistrates` court even if there is still no charge. 

The underlying consideration for the “battered wife” is commendable. It is the swing of the legal pendulum in action. When a legal or police attitude to a problem has swung so far from an underlying reality it auto reverses in a totally opposite direction and the process is repeated ad infinitum. A couple of decades ago the police and judicial attitude was minimal interference to possibly violent incidents of a “domestic nature”. That approach was eventually and rightly seen as ignoring the real and sometimes murderous attacks carried out usually by men on their wives or female partners. Now it would appear the boot is metaphorically if not in reality on the other foot…..a police officer`s size 12s. Does this initiative come under the term “due process”? I think not.

UTILISATION RATE, UTILASATION RATE, UTILISATION RATE….REPEAT IT OFTEN ENOUGH AND ALL WILL BE WELL

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 24. Nov. 2010. – 16:07:58

The Justice Department and its ministers are at it again in repeating the mantra oft uttered in the last three months that magistrates` courts` utilisation rates at a current 64% must be increased to 80%. Their thinking seems to be that if all the current workload is squeezed through fewer courts the utilisation rates would somehow increase to the nirvana of 80%. Without going into the principles of eg water pressure through pipes of varying diameters or voltage, current and resistance the ministers are talking nonsense. Returning to the plumbing analogy if low water pressure [low utilisation rate] is caused by poor turbine efficiency at a pumping station no reduction in pipe diameter [increased utilisation rate] is going to improve the amount of water at the tap in the kitchen. Only the pressure will increase; not the amount flowing through.

I have no reason to doubt the figure of 64%. I have many reasons to be sure that court closures will not increase that figure to 80%. The result will be a lengthening of the time taken to process court lists. So many agencies are involved in taking a case to court that to consider court closures can increase efficiency is barking mad. Only structural reform of these agencies and their terms of service will produce results. An example is the much vaunted CJSSS…..criminal justice simple, speedy, summary where all involved CPS, courts and magistrates are all supposed to be well prepared with full knowledge of all cases on the day. A happy slappy slogan was attached by some bright sparks in Whitehall to what should be normal presentation of cases to any remand court in the country. I sat on such a court a couple of weeks ago having been required to arrive a half hour earlier than usual for preparation and the CPS dedicated case worker……..or should that nomenclature now be assistant prosecutor…………….was at her wits end looking for files which had not been given to her, which were incomplete or were ambiguous insofar as notes did not correspond with actions or the court file.

I copy below a parliamentary question and answer of November 23rd which demonstrates this government`s reliance on the holy grail of utilisation.
Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed, Liberal Democrat)
What steps are Ministers taking to ensure that savings do not simply become higher costs for other Departments or other parts of their own Department, whether in the context of magistrates court closures, which adds to police costs, or changes in the legal aid system that generate demand for expenditure elsewhere? Is there a mechanism for assessing how costs will fall elsewhere?
• Hansard source (Citation: HC Deb, 23 November 2010, c149)
Nick Herbert (Minister of State, Justice; Arundel and South Downs, Conservative)
I agree with my right hon. Friend about the importance of ensuring that what he describes does not happen, but he will know that there is significant under-utilisation of magistrates courts. That is why we have had to take this action in consulting about closure, not least in relation to the Tynedale magistrates court, which is adjacent to his constituency in Northumberland and which is operating at a utilisation rate of only about two thirds.

Once again the alibi of utilisation is brought forth as reason for closure. Bah Humbug!

I WILL NOT BE ATTENDING THE BENCH CHRISTMAS PARTY

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 23. Nov. 2010. – 15:31:25

In my other life where I tried hard to make an honest penny I was the one who authorised the finance and generally oversaw the arrangements for the small firm`s ubiquitous Christmas party. So I have no experience whatsoever of the oft derided common or garden office Christmas party except as chauffeur and “talk to me please” accompaniment to my wife at her virtually compulsory appearances at various places of employment around early to mid December.

When I was appointed my bench was a jolly mixing of personalities but when we left the building that was it. It is still a mix of jolly and some not so jolly personalities. But in the last few years there have been Christmas parties from 6.30pm to 8.30pm organised by the “social committee” on the assigned day. I have not attended any. I am not a grumpy; I enjoy good company accompanied by the requisite amount of food and a few ml of the amber liquid. But I generally choose when to avail myself of such occasions and with whom I wish to share the anecdotal evidence of the events of the preceding weeks, months or years that might be of interest. Colleagues who have attended our Christmas parties previously have told me of their general lack of enthusiasm to attend another. I`m not surprised. Most of us drive to court. I don`t drink and drive at all. Some colleagues will have the one drink that will not turn the crystals. With a large bench one`s relationships are usually no more than semi formal with most, an acquaintanceship with some and friendly with a few. I will not be changing my habit of declining the invitation to this year`s event.

THE £COSTS OF BEING A MURDERER

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 22. Nov. 2010. – 16:03:37

Not being a crown court practitioner I am unaware of the legal niceties involved in guilty after trial murder defendants being ordered to pay prosecution costs. I would hazard a guess that for various reasons it rarely happens or perhaps is rarely reported except perhaps in the legal press.

However a high ranking member of the Saudi Arabian family that rules that land was recently convicted in London of the brutal murder with sexual overtones of his servant. It is reported that he has been given until Jan 17th 2011 to pay the prosecution costs of £63,763 in addition of course to his defence costs. Perhaps that principle should be applied in its totality to other multi millionaire miscreants who fail to be acquitted at crown court.

THE HARD MEN OF CARLISLE

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 22. Nov. 2010. – 15:24:02

There were interesting goings on recently at Carlisle Crown Court. In an area famous for its history of border fighting from Picts and Romans to the border Reivers and with its male inhabitants considering themselves as hard or harder than their eastern neighbours in Northumberland it seems old habits die hard. 

A butch Cumberlander on a DV charge sacked his female solicitor and barrister on the basis that their sex would prejudice their representation and would be against his best interests until persuaded otherwise by the judge [male].

And as if that wasn`t enough to attest to the supposed dominance of the y chromosome in Carlise Crown Court it took ten police cars and up to 25 police officers to control fighting. Unless there is a risk of violence my court has no security officers present in court at all. My sittings at my local Crown Court seem to indicate that a permanent police presence is absent there also. Short term cash savings perhaps but on the other hand………………………………..

COURTS NEWS//CAMBERWELL`S VIRTUALLY NOT SO WELL

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 22. Nov. 2010. – 15:16:37

Virtual Courts are controversial. The principle of having courts in police stations however the arguments are tended is not one that has met universal acclaim. The practice, as argued by proponents, would convince doubters . It has not. It seems the optimistic gloss has become tarnished. The “court” in Camberwell South London is in chaos according to a report in the Law Society Gazette. This observer considers that irrespective of practice the idea of courts ensconced in police stations does not sit well with judicial independence. I therefore look forward to the official announcement that this pilot scheme will not be a basis for future plans.

LORD PHILLIPS OFFERS SUPPORT TO MAGISTRATES

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 22. Nov. 2010. – 14:21:54

A former Chief Justice of England is a good person to have on one`s side when the opponent is The Secretary of State for Justice. The freedom of the red benches is as good as a dose of sodium pentothal the truth drug not that former LCJs need stimulants to be truthful but the effect of the drug is apparently to reduce inhibitions about talking on a subject even a top secret subject. Good Lord Phillips has mooted that J.P.s be able to sentence for up to twelve months custody. Interesting times are ahead when K.Clarke publishes his proposals for our courts.

NO MORE RUNNERS AT BOW STREET

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 22. Nov. 2010. – 08:48:03

Its square was orange in colour and it could be bought for £180. When I played Monopoly as a child the set of Bow Street, Vine Street and Marlborough Street was my favourite. Why…..I don`t know except I was very rarely beaten when the game ended. Perhaps because that set was neither upmarket Mayfair nor down at heel Old Kent Road it had an appeal as being in the middle of the market. I must remember to tell my analyst that, if ever I feel the need to unburden myself to a total stranger for £squids/hour.

Bow Street Magistrates` Court must be the most well known court name after the Old Bailey. It began dishing out justice to the villains or should that be villeins of London in 1740 and closed its doors in 2006. The enterprising individual who bought it then for c €25 million is reported to have sold it for £28 million in hard cash to an Austrian hotelier. It`s likely its new customers will have more comfortable bed and breakfast than the previous occupants of the building.

LORD JUDGE AND JURIES

 

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 21. Nov. 2010. – 12:46:16

There has been much attention paid to Lord Judge, Lord Chief Justice and the judiciary`s main man. This is as it should be. And when he comments on the jury system everybody listens and that also is how it should be. But critical comment has been………… pianissimo. 

The good lord has explained his discomfort in that jurors might seek further knowledge from outside the courtroom when considering facts pertaining to a case. In other words they might seek to increase their knowledge by the common man`s most accessible source of information……the internet……. which might offer many things but in general terms is an enormous fantasamagorical library with an indexing system easy enough for Joe Blogs to find in seconds eg the Italian musical term for playing softly. But in the good old days only toffs and so called intellectuals had shelves full of books which contained information that was or could be useful for or of interest to them. Of course in those days old or good most such folk declined to serve on juries; they were too busy or considered themselves too important to judge their fellow man. Now that`s all changed and everybody……..or is anybody a better description?……..can be chosen for jury service. And that`s the point. There is no consideration of anybody`s intelligence or ability to follow the performance, to appreciate the hurdle “beyond reasonable doubt”, no test to ascertain the limits of anybody`s understanding of the English language or anybody`s capability of balancing the credibility of witnesses or the facility for anybody to comprehend a judge`s summing up. Truly anybody can be a bit thick but then that`s why we have a jury of twelve people who can be anybody. Of course under current attitudes supposedly handed down from Magna Carta and modified for current times peer review by any other term is what determines a defendant`s guilt or innocence. 

In effect the LCJ is complaining that ignorant jurors trying to fulfil their task are seeking knowledge outside the courtroom which others in their group might already possess by virtue of their education, profession, general or specific knowledge or quite simply a higher IQ. Universal jury service is now an outmoded concept and sooner or later a senior member of the judiciary, probably after retirement, will step into the public arena and say so. This is not to say I am advocating judge[s] only courts……I am against the practice of single District Judges acting in trials as both judge and jury. I am suggesting that the concept of juries now constituted is not an 11th commandment notwithstanding the recent paper Are Juries Fair? Another interesting paper taking a wide historical perspective is A Historical and Comparative Perspective on the Common Law Jury . More research should be undertaken into possible variations to ensure that justice is done and seen to be done lest another government with similar authoritarian tendencies as those which lurked in Downing Street from 1997 until May pulls up its drawbridge and judge[s] only trials risk becoming commonplace.

CURFEWS AND TAGS

  

by TheJusticeofthePeace @ 05. Dec. 2010. – 13:38:15

One of the most difficult decisions for any bench is deciding whether to remand in custody a defendant awaiting trial or to remand on bail considering that the starting point is that bail is the right of the accused. With the advent of electronic tagging to verify any breaking of curfew restrictions many defendants are on bail who perhaps twenty years ago would have been kept in custody. The tag will send a signal if the wearer leaves the assigned address within the restricted hours. Such was and is the case of Asil Nadir, fugitive tycoon, who voluntarily returned from self imposed exile to face trial after having received an assurance that he would be granted bail. Amongst the bail conditions was a home curfew from midnight until 6.00am and the wearing of a tag. According to a TV news report there was a knock on his door in the wee sma` hours [around 01.30?] by SERCO who monitor such matters for Her Majesty`s Court Service. Inside the house were Mr Nasir and his house guests. There is no knowledge whether or not they were asleep in bed at the time. He will not be charged with a breach of his curfew.

This scenario reminded me of a young mother also tagged and also curfewed between midnight and 6.00am who was before us in September for breach which she denied. SERCO prosecutor told us a technician visited the house at 00.45 to verify if the tag was working. The defendant told us she was indoors asleep and was afraid to open the front door at that time. We accepted her good reasons for her fear. Delegated powers to people who might have a “jobsworth” attitude to their duties are sometimes a mistake.