I sat yesterday at one of the outlying courts that now forms part of our amalgamated bench. The courthouse is pretty tatty, and only uses three of its four courtrooms - the whole place stays closed on Fridays.
We had two trials listed, one of them down as all-day, but we were not able to start either, due to the non-attendance of witnesses. The complainant/victim in a case of alleged DLT-style groping at her place of work has gone to Scotland to live with her dad. We had the option of issuing a witness summons, but enforcing it in Scotland could be tricky (and expensive).
We then took a trial from another court, and the defendant was clearly a man with multiple problems, including mental issues ( a clue was the fact that in police interview an Appropriate Adult was called in).We acquitted him, and he flung himself to his knees in the well of the court, with his hands in a position of prayer. He seemed to have every intention of staying there a while, so we retired, leaving his counsel to persuade him that he ought to go outside.
Just wondering what makes this courthouse any more “outlying” than any other in your LJA
ReplyDeleteOur LJA covers three London boroughs. The three courthouses are unevenly located, such that the southernmost is two hours by public transport from the north of the LJA. In addition it is also old shabby and inefficient. That's why I call it outlying.
DeleteI was appointed to a certain court. We then joined with two others. My old 'home' court takes between twenty and forty minutes to reach depending on traffic. My two 'new' courts take between an hour and a quarter and well over two hours to reach depending on traffic. I know which I think of as outlying courts.
ReplyDeleteThe degree to which a court is categorised as 'outlying' is directly proportional to the expenses being claimed to reach it.
ReplyDeleteOur Legal Advisers are restricted to no more than one hour's travel to the court to which they are listed that day, to avoid fatigue. Yet reading the above, and from my own experience in occasionally having to travel to the farthest courthouse in our county - 52 miles and two hours' rush-hour driving from home - we volunteers are obviously considered to be indefatigable.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately that's probably how the bureaucrats who dreamed it all up view it but not how a court user would. If the distance and fare from my home to any one of three courts is pretty much the same but two of them take three or maybe four times longer to reach, I know which I will think of as 'outlying'
ReplyDeleteThe number of people who are in need of mental health care, but who end up being dealt with by the police and the courts, bothers me. I was talking to a police officer acquaintance recently and he happened to mention just how much of his working time was spent dealing with people who should (in his opinion) be receiving proper mental health care, rather than being left to fend for themselves.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that a fair proportion of his time was being taken up in dealing with people with mental health problems, something he wasn't equipped to do, and that the local hospitals weren't too keen on helping out either. He was complaining that much of the time he was expected to be a social and health care worker, trying to stop people with such problems from harming themselves or becoming a public nuisance, when what they really need is proper mental health care.
My personal view is that the much vaunted "care in the community" programme has resulted in a greater number of vulnerable people on the streets, with no one to help them except the police and the legal system. This seems inappropriate to me, as all that has happened is that the costs of caring for these people has switched from the health care budget to the policing budget and judicial system.
I can't agree with you more. My partner has mental health issues but gets no mental health care. It has been refused at almost every level other than prescribing pills. I can clearly see how such folk end up in police cells if they have nobody else to look our for them. They're not necessarily criminals but fall through the holes in the 'system' and end up being a burden to the police and courts.
DeleteWhat were the other options in trial 1, and which did you choose?
ReplyDeleteBystander referred to an option, not options plural, and the option usually is to issue the summons, or not to issue it. The prosecution can now ask for a witness summons at the case management stage, even if they have no idea if they will ever need it.
DeleteYes it can force a witness (usually the victim) to come to court but no court can force a witness not to have a lapse of memory of events on the day of an alleged offence, and hence to give evidence, let alone the evidence the prosecution seeks..