Not too far from where I live, and not too far from the courthouse in which I sit, there was a road accident today. Early reports speak of at least three people killed, and a dozen or so injured. Many families will either be in mourning or sitting at their loved ones' bedsides tonight, and my sympathy goes out to them.
Tomorrow's national papers are unlikely to mention this tragedy, or, if they do, it will be a few lines down-column on page 27.
I am routinely accused, on this blog and in my everyday life, of being indifferent to victims of one crime or another. How much more callous though is society's indifference to the 3,500 or so people who die on the roads each year? There has been more indignation on this blog's comments about shoplifters in the last week than about dead road users in the last year.
Sense of proportion anyone?
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Wednesday, May 30, 2007
One More Slice Off The Salami
This Times report is just another step towards the police taking over functions that properly belong to the courts. Wasn't it Stalin who said that by taking a slice at a time you end up with the whole salami?
The Police and CPS now use this natty new logo, which tells us exactly where they are headed.
The Police and CPS now use this natty new logo, which tells us exactly where they are headed.
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Funny, That
"Walked free from court" is a phrase that infuriates me when I see it in the paper, implying as it does that any outcome that does not involve immediate incarceration is a let-off. Last week it was used about someone who was given six months but had already served more than that on remand. Every week there are people who are acquitted having served months and sometimes years on remand. I have never seen a headline "Innocent Man Held For Nine Months".
Early Days
I occasionally get an email from someone whose interest in becoming a magistrate has been either sparked or encouraged by this blog, sometimes to ask my advice about the interview, about which I am not much help since it was all different two decades ago, and, even better, sometimes to say that they have been appointed.
So what happens once you have had that letter? Well at first there may be a delay (often due to CRB checks) then you will get a letter inviting you to an orientation meeting at the courthouse to which you are to be allocated. There you will meet your fellow recruits. You will have a bond with these throughout your time on the bench, since you train together make mistakes together, and help each other out. My year-group, of which I am the only one still sitting, still meets for dinner at least once a year. You will hear from the Bench Chairman, who will welcome you, offer his services as a confidant if you have any problems, and explain the structure of the bench. He will warn you about the decorum that will be expected of you now that you are to have the letters JP after your name, and he will outline the pitfalls that may trap the unwary - an incautious word to the press, a cross word in the wrong place, or the flash of a GATSO camera in your mirror. The Clerk or a deputy will tell you of the broad outline of your training, and when the first session will be. You will be given a lot of reading to do, and you may be advised to sort out a filing system at home - you are going to need it. You will be allocated a mentor, and you will make a number of observation visits to court (one at an 'away' court) to get the feel of the place with the mentor to talk you through what is going on. Later there will be visits to prisons and probation facilities.
Then, a few weeks later, the swearing-in. The format varies across the country, but in London it takes place at a Crown Court in front of a Circuit Judge. Our resident judge puts on a good show, sitting on his bench, flanked by the Bench Chairmen of the new JPs and with five or six wigged and robed judges standing along the back of the bench. You step forward in turn and take the Oath of Alleigance and the Judicial Oath, shake hands with His Honour, and that's it. You are one of Her Majesty's Justices of the Peace. The Judge says a few words of welcome and of caution, and then those on the bench withdraw, allowing the new JPs and their guests to pose for photographs in the courtroom before going back for tea and biscuits with the Judge and the Bench Chairmen.
Your training will start straight away, and once you have done the basic bit plus your observations you can start to sit - and that's where the real learning begins.
So what happens once you have had that letter? Well at first there may be a delay (often due to CRB checks) then you will get a letter inviting you to an orientation meeting at the courthouse to which you are to be allocated. There you will meet your fellow recruits. You will have a bond with these throughout your time on the bench, since you train together make mistakes together, and help each other out. My year-group, of which I am the only one still sitting, still meets for dinner at least once a year. You will hear from the Bench Chairman, who will welcome you, offer his services as a confidant if you have any problems, and explain the structure of the bench. He will warn you about the decorum that will be expected of you now that you are to have the letters JP after your name, and he will outline the pitfalls that may trap the unwary - an incautious word to the press, a cross word in the wrong place, or the flash of a GATSO camera in your mirror. The Clerk or a deputy will tell you of the broad outline of your training, and when the first session will be. You will be given a lot of reading to do, and you may be advised to sort out a filing system at home - you are going to need it. You will be allocated a mentor, and you will make a number of observation visits to court (one at an 'away' court) to get the feel of the place with the mentor to talk you through what is going on. Later there will be visits to prisons and probation facilities.
Then, a few weeks later, the swearing-in. The format varies across the country, but in London it takes place at a Crown Court in front of a Circuit Judge. Our resident judge puts on a good show, sitting on his bench, flanked by the Bench Chairmen of the new JPs and with five or six wigged and robed judges standing along the back of the bench. You step forward in turn and take the Oath of Alleigance and the Judicial Oath, shake hands with His Honour, and that's it. You are one of Her Majesty's Justices of the Peace. The Judge says a few words of welcome and of caution, and then those on the bench withdraw, allowing the new JPs and their guests to pose for photographs in the courtroom before going back for tea and biscuits with the Judge and the Bench Chairmen.
Your training will start straight away, and once you have done the basic bit plus your observations you can start to sit - and that's where the real learning begins.
Monday, May 28, 2007
Personal Finance Column
Here are two great money-saving ideas (writes our resident financial expert) that can save YOU money!
Thinking of having home improvements done? Found your tradesman? Thinking of giving him cash up front to buy materials? WRONG! Get a list of what he wants and order it yourself. That way it belongs to you, and you won't get into the situation that I heard about recently where a nice couple gave their plumber £2500 to buy the bits for their kitchen and never saw him again. He is now in custody awaiting trial for theft, but it has taken four years to track him down.
Owe fines and costs to a court? In arrears? Not answering letters or phone calls? Putting the whole thing off? WRONG! We recently had a very indignant chap in the Fines Court who had neglected to do anything about his fine and he came home one day to find that the bailiffs had pretty much cleared out his house, and sold the stuff at auction. What made him cross was the fact that goods that he claimed to have a replacement value of about £5000 had been sold for £350 or so after expenses, leaving him still owing the court £650 of his fines. He was rather excitable and was waving documents about and claiming that the court 'owed' him over £4000. I could understand why he was upset when I saw the auctioneers' report showing things like a flat screen TV sold for £22 and a kettle for 50p, but I had to tell him that he was the author of his own misfortune, that he could have avoided all this bother by paying the fine as ordered and that unless he wanted a return visit from the bailiffs he had better keep on paying £20 per week. We went out for a cup of tea and he was still ranting at the clerk.
Thinking of having home improvements done? Found your tradesman? Thinking of giving him cash up front to buy materials? WRONG! Get a list of what he wants and order it yourself. That way it belongs to you, and you won't get into the situation that I heard about recently where a nice couple gave their plumber £2500 to buy the bits for their kitchen and never saw him again. He is now in custody awaiting trial for theft, but it has taken four years to track him down.
Owe fines and costs to a court? In arrears? Not answering letters or phone calls? Putting the whole thing off? WRONG! We recently had a very indignant chap in the Fines Court who had neglected to do anything about his fine and he came home one day to find that the bailiffs had pretty much cleared out his house, and sold the stuff at auction. What made him cross was the fact that goods that he claimed to have a replacement value of about £5000 had been sold for £350 or so after expenses, leaving him still owing the court £650 of his fines. He was rather excitable and was waving documents about and claiming that the court 'owed' him over £4000. I could understand why he was upset when I saw the auctioneers' report showing things like a flat screen TV sold for £22 and a kettle for 50p, but I had to tell him that he was the author of his own misfortune, that he could have avoided all this bother by paying the fine as ordered and that unless he wanted a return visit from the bailiffs he had better keep on paying £20 per week. We went out for a cup of tea and he was still ranting at the clerk.
More About Addicts
The comments to the two previous posts are predominantly hostile, and in a couple of cases have misinterpreted what I said. To be quite clear, the three week adjournment (for a fresh report) was not something that we chose to do to help the man, it was a legal necessity. The point I was trying to make was that once we had revoked the community order and bailed him to the next hearing he was on his own, hence my efforts to point him towards the voluntary drug service. We had no power to order anything.
Nobody has the answer to drug addiction, including me, but there are certain inescapable facts, first among them the fact that for low-level thefts (most of those we see are £100 or less) no prison sentence of any length is going to be imposed. Secondly, imprisonment simply doesn't prevent reoffending. About eighty per cent of these petty thieves will reoffend within a year or two of release. There are a number of pilot specialist drug courts, one of the best-known of which is West London. District Judge Justin Phillips (whom I have met at a conference) has a policy of following through the people he deals with, having them in for a review, in an informal setting, every six weeks or so. He talks to them about their rehab progress, their families, and their lives in general, but he backs this up by being perfectly prepared, as he makes clear, to send them inside if they let him down. It isn't the answer, but it is a start, and early results suggest that it has a better chance of preventing reoffending than the disjointed system that my court operates, where the offender will see a different bench every time. There is much work to be done on this, and everyone involved is realistic enough to expect setbacks and disappointments, but I believe that it is worth a try. If my bench sets up a drug court I shall volunteer to work in it.
Nobody has the answer to drug addiction, including me, but there are certain inescapable facts, first among them the fact that for low-level thefts (most of those we see are £100 or less) no prison sentence of any length is going to be imposed. Secondly, imprisonment simply doesn't prevent reoffending. About eighty per cent of these petty thieves will reoffend within a year or two of release. There are a number of pilot specialist drug courts, one of the best-known of which is West London. District Judge Justin Phillips (whom I have met at a conference) has a policy of following through the people he deals with, having them in for a review, in an informal setting, every six weeks or so. He talks to them about their rehab progress, their families, and their lives in general, but he backs this up by being perfectly prepared, as he makes clear, to send them inside if they let him down. It isn't the answer, but it is a start, and early results suggest that it has a better chance of preventing reoffending than the disjointed system that my court operates, where the offender will see a different bench every time. There is much work to be done on this, and everyone involved is realistic enough to expect setbacks and disappointments, but I believe that it is worth a try. If my bench sets up a drug court I shall volunteer to work in it.
Sunday, May 27, 2007
Sad Thought
Following on from yesterday's post, it has occurred to me this evening that if magistrates impose a prison sentence, the defendant is taken down there and then and will be in custody from that moment. If we make a community order its key elements may take weeks or months to be implemented (and by the way, the excellent Domestic Abuse Programme is full for the forseeable future and we are asked not to use it until further notice). Worse, if a drug treatment programme or psychiatric treatment appears to be the only way of preventing reoffending - we have no power to order it. We are reduced to pleading with probation or the Council or whomever. Is it surprising that some benches decide that prison is the only disposal that they can be sure will actually happpen?
Sad Sight
I knew as soon as he came into the dock that he was a junkie - serious, long-term, set in his habit. He looked terrible, with the hollow eyes and sunken cheeks that follow heroin use, but at least he lacked that awful dead look that you sometimes see in a man who has given up completely. He had 40 previous convictions, nearly all for shoplifting and was given a community order at the end of last year, including supervision and drug treatment. His compliance had been patchy, but a few weeks ago he had relapsed. The local drug unit withdrew his methadone since he was using street heroin, and he stopped reporting to probation, which was a real shame since they had been close to getting him a place in residential rehab. We were asked to revoke the order, which we did, and re-sentence him. It was hard to see any outcome other than prison, but we were persuaded to order a fresh report on him and to put the case off for three weeks.
That left the problem of what to do with him in those weeks, with no probation support and no methadone. All that we could do was to tell him to get back to the voluntary drug agency, so that he would be able to show the next bench that his motivation was not entirely extinct. I told him that we could make no promises, and that all options would be open to the next court, but that three weeks of voluntary co-operation with the drug unit might just help him to avoid prison. I was really talking to his equally drug-raddled lady friend at the back of the court in the hope that she could encourage him through to the next court in the hope that the residential rehab might be a possibility again.
What are his chances? Fifty-fifty at best, I reckon. Prison is completely pointless, other than for an enforced detox; treatment may or many not work. A distinct possibility is a lonely drug sodden death in some festering rat hole of a flat. As I said, a sad sight.
That left the problem of what to do with him in those weeks, with no probation support and no methadone. All that we could do was to tell him to get back to the voluntary drug agency, so that he would be able to show the next bench that his motivation was not entirely extinct. I told him that we could make no promises, and that all options would be open to the next court, but that three weeks of voluntary co-operation with the drug unit might just help him to avoid prison. I was really talking to his equally drug-raddled lady friend at the back of the court in the hope that she could encourage him through to the next court in the hope that the residential rehab might be a possibility again.
What are his chances? Fifty-fifty at best, I reckon. Prison is completely pointless, other than for an enforced detox; treatment may or many not work. A distinct possibility is a lonely drug sodden death in some festering rat hole of a flat. As I said, a sad sight.
Saturday, May 26, 2007
Fairly Typical
While giving my study a much-overdue tidying I came across a court list from a month or so ago. I had used the back to make some notes, and had absent-mindedly brought the whole lot home. So here is a typical list from a remand court:-
1) Woman, 20, Shoplifting
2) Man, leaving car in dangerous position
3) Man, 19, possession of cannabis x 2
4) Man, 19, Shoplifting
5) Man, 19, Theft, Fail to Surrender to Bail
6) Man, 23, Drive Unfit Through Drugs
7) Man, 34, Making off without payment (aka bilking) x 3
8) Man, 20, Possession of cannabis (55 grams) and 5 grams
9) Man, 31, drink-drive (125ug/100) Limit is 35
10)Man, 30, Shoplifting
11)Man, 19, Criminal damage (£1000) to car (girlfriend's?)
12)Woman, 20, No insurance (supermarket car park)
13)Man, 51, Offensive indecent or obscene electronic communication x 3
14)Man, 31, Application to vary bail conditions.
15)Man, 51, Assault constable
16)Man, 43, Fail to provide sample of breath
17)Man, Leaving car in restricted street
18)Man, 33, Dog dangerously out of control in a public place
19)Man, 24, Offensive weapon (metal cosh), use car without insurance
20)Man, 31, Criminal damage (£1000) to furniture (girlfriend's?)
21)Man, 19, Affray
22)Man, 24, Drive Disqualified, No Insurance
23)Man, 18, Fail to comply with curfew (tagging) order
24)Woman, 20, Affray (linked with 21), criminal damage to car
25)Man, 41, Affray (linked with 21 and 24)
26)Man, 43, No Insurance, No MoT
In addition there were 10 extra cases not listed, half of them in custody. This gives you an idea of a typical remand court day - nothing drastic on the main list, but a few nasties in the extras. This was on a midweek day when two youth courts were sitting so all of the under-18s were dealt with there. I wasn't sitting that day, but I believe they managed to finish at 4.30. Not a bad day's work.
1) Woman, 20, Shoplifting
2) Man, leaving car in dangerous position
3) Man, 19, possession of cannabis x 2
4) Man, 19, Shoplifting
5) Man, 19, Theft, Fail to Surrender to Bail
6) Man, 23, Drive Unfit Through Drugs
7) Man, 34, Making off without payment (aka bilking) x 3
8) Man, 20, Possession of cannabis (55 grams) and 5 grams
9) Man, 31, drink-drive (125ug/100) Limit is 35
10)Man, 30, Shoplifting
11)Man, 19, Criminal damage (£1000) to car (girlfriend's?)
12)Woman, 20, No insurance (supermarket car park)
13)Man, 51, Offensive indecent or obscene electronic communication x 3
14)Man, 31, Application to vary bail conditions.
15)Man, 51, Assault constable
16)Man, 43, Fail to provide sample of breath
17)Man, Leaving car in restricted street
18)Man, 33, Dog dangerously out of control in a public place
19)Man, 24, Offensive weapon (metal cosh), use car without insurance
20)Man, 31, Criminal damage (£1000) to furniture (girlfriend's?)
21)Man, 19, Affray
22)Man, 24, Drive Disqualified, No Insurance
23)Man, 18, Fail to comply with curfew (tagging) order
24)Woman, 20, Affray (linked with 21), criminal damage to car
25)Man, 41, Affray (linked with 21 and 24)
26)Man, 43, No Insurance, No MoT
In addition there were 10 extra cases not listed, half of them in custody. This gives you an idea of a typical remand court day - nothing drastic on the main list, but a few nasties in the extras. This was on a midweek day when two youth courts were sitting so all of the under-18s were dealt with there. I wasn't sitting that day, but I believe they managed to finish at 4.30. Not a bad day's work.
Friday, May 25, 2007
Once Bitten........
A year or two ago, in a case about which I can't say too much, we refused to adjourn a trial in which the principal witness had not turned up, as he had threatened to do some weeks before. Sometimes we think that a case needs to be put out of its misery, and this was one of them - it was going nowhere. The usual procedure is for the Crown to offer no evidence at this point. The Prosecutor, not at all pleased, shot to his feet and made an application to adduce hearsay evidence - the statement made by the missing witness. We saw that as an attempt to get round our decision and we refused to allow the application. The three of us were in agreement as was our clerk.
A few weeks later I heard that our decision was being appealed. We came second. We would have been quite entitled to refuse the hearsay application, but we should have given full consideration to to the criteria in the Act, and recorded our reasons.
That's fine, no hard feelings. Win some, lose some. You can imagine my reaction this week though, when we were faced with a near-identical situation, with a crucial witness being unavailable - a fact that had been known to the Crown for months, but one that they had failed to note in the file. So we refused to adjourn, and the prosecutor applied for permission to make a hearsay application. Determined to get it right this time we allowed the application and I made careful notes of the criteria that we had to consider. The defence then opposed the application, putting in his own interpretation of the law. We then had the clerk advise us in open court and went outside to consider. When we went back in (to refuse the application) I had half a sheet of carefully made notes of our reasons which I read out before passing them to the clerk to put on the file. Let's see how we get on this time.
A few weeks later I heard that our decision was being appealed. We came second. We would have been quite entitled to refuse the hearsay application, but we should have given full consideration to to the criteria in the Act, and recorded our reasons.
That's fine, no hard feelings. Win some, lose some. You can imagine my reaction this week though, when we were faced with a near-identical situation, with a crucial witness being unavailable - a fact that had been known to the Crown for months, but one that they had failed to note in the file. So we refused to adjourn, and the prosecutor applied for permission to make a hearsay application. Determined to get it right this time we allowed the application and I made careful notes of the criteria that we had to consider. The defence then opposed the application, putting in his own interpretation of the law. We then had the clerk advise us in open court and went outside to consider. When we went back in (to refuse the application) I had half a sheet of carefully made notes of our reasons which I read out before passing them to the clerk to put on the file. Let's see how we get on this time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)