Friday, May 30, 2014

Slightly Odd Day

Today was a bit out of the ordinary. Our trial fell apart because of a Mickey-Mouse foul-up by the CPS. These days the wind is blowing pretty briskly in the direction of telling the CPS to get on with it: this usually results in them offering no evidence and the case being thrown out. Today, however, there were victims to be considered in a case of harassment, so we adjourned, making it quite clear that we had performed a balancing act.

We then took a case involving two Eastern Europeans, who were assisted by an interpreter. That meant that the trial took at least twice as long as it might have done, especially as prosecuting counsel took ages to get over the simplest points.

Ploughing through the reams of evidence we were diverted by a racket coming up from the cells under the court. Incoherent shouting, thumps and bangs carried on for about half an hour as a prisoner expressed his displeasure at being locked up.

There's always something new coming through the door of our court.

9 comments:

  1. Are you allowed to say if the interpreter was independent, or if they were employed by a company.
    John Gibson

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The case was under Civil Procedure, so the respondents had to supply and pay for their own interpreter. I don't think he was from Capita.

      Delete
    2. What would happen then if they claim they can't pay? Would proceedings be suspended, a free (at point of receipt) interpreter supplied, or what? (I presume the case wouldn't simply be dismissed.)

      Delete
    3. Civil cases bypass all the safeguards of a criminal trial. No free interpreter, no legal aid, no right to silence, no presumption of innocence. You defend yourself or you lose, and costs go with the cause. A man of straw might be able to find no-win-no-fee representation but if not he's on his tod.

      Delete
  2. It doesn't seem right that magistrates, who donate their time for no pay for the good of society, should be expected to hear and judge a civil case between two parties.

    ReplyDelete
  3. One of the parties was a Government organisation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was being slightly tongue-in-cheek since only the government brings civil cases to a Magistrates' court. Mere mortals have to go to the County or High courts.

      It seems wrong to me that the government tips the scales of justice its favour by bringing confiscation proceedings under civil law (with the safeguards of a criminal case stripped away) but lists the case in what is essentially a criminal court presided over by people who have volunteered to play a part in the criminal justice system and then applies a criminal sanction (effectively a fine) when they win under a balance of probability standard of proof. (Which is contrary to the 1689 Bill of Rights, but who cares about that any more?)

      A technical question for Bystander, or any mag: in a civil rules case is any party expected to sit in the dock, or are all parties allowed on the front bench?

      Delete
  4. Who does hear civil cases? Is it always a judge where the case involves two private parties?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe that although most civil cases are heard by a judge, sometimes a jury is involved. It's outside my experience. Some matters before magistrates are dealt with under civil (rather then Criminal) Procedure Rules, that affect the way the trial is conducted. An example is the Proceeds of Crime Act (PoCA) where seizure applications are civil proceedings, but in the criminal court.

      Delete

Posts are pre-moderated. Please bear with us if this takes a little time, but the number of bores and obsessives was getting out of hand, as were the fake comments advertising rubbish.