A Verdict That Justifies Juries

This is a report of a Jury's decision. I have no comment on the case, other than to observe that it is a textbook example of why the jury system exists and should exist for the future.

Keeping Schtum

"Thou shalt not grass" is the First Commandment among the criminal classes, as it is, albeit more elegantly expressed, among boys at expensive schools. In Sicily they call it Omerta.
There are countless situations in society where sealed lips are mandatory. The priest in the confessional, the solicitor with his client, the doctor with his patient are everyday examples. Much official business is protected by secrecy, as are the doings of gentlemen's clubs, Freemasons and, for all I know, the Flat Earth Society. Judicial discussions between members of a bench must never be revealed to anyone.
I have attended many meetings where we have accepted Chatham House Rules, which allow free discussion, but oblige participants not to repeat others' words outside. Top of the tree are Privy Councillors who are bound to keep confidence about all of the many secrets that are revealed to them; this allows for uninhibited debate among people who might be opponents in a different context.
So all of this helps to oil the wheels, and makes for sensible governance - so long as it is not abused to deceive the public.
That's why it is such a shame that the death of Blair Peach led to a closing of police ranks that resulted in a successful conspiracy to defeat justice. Don Corleone would be proud of them if they were his soldiers.

Legal Aid - A Guest Blog by Learner

Legal aid is clearly a target for further cuts. The proposed executive agency under the MoJ makes it even more subject to ministerial control and inevitably an easier candidate for cost cutting.

The current spend is about £2bn p.a but what is not well known is that almost half gets spent on a mere five percent of court cases. The magistrates courts, well known to readers of the Magistrate's Blog, account for 95% of criminal prosecutions yet incur about 55% of the £2bn. The rest is spent on long, high profile trials in the higher courts. 5% of the cases gets 45% of the spend.
So what happens in the magistrates' court is that we have to spend more time to assist the unrepresented defendant, slowing down the courts and adding expense. If ever there was a case for a proper cost benefit analysis, this is it. And just in case the bureaucrat who did it last time reads this, please allocate some element of a cost to the time attributed to the magistrates themselves as well as the court. Even though the mags cost little, we do deserve to be considered!


(Learner is a long-standing friend who has been a JP for over thirty years)

The Dog That Didn't Bark In The Night

As the General Election campaign enters its last week there has been little or no mention of one of the most significant legacies of the New Labour years; the erosion of liberty and the increasingly authoritarian way in which we are governed.
Thousands of new offences have been created, and many of these are enforced not by courts but by various levels of public servants. More and more organs of the State have been empowered to levy penalties on the citizen. Only about half of the so-called 'Offences Brought to Justice' ever get to court, as a succession of hardline Home Secretaries have preferred to allow the police the CPS and other bodies to impose sanctions out of the public gaze, behind closed doors. Now, incredibly, even night club doormen are being allowed to hand out fixed penalties. Civil Enforcement of parking regulations means that your only appeal against a decision is to an adjudicator, and if he is not on your side, that's it - no further avenues are open. Proportionality has gone out of the window. Jumping a red traffic light, an offence that can in some circumstances kill people, carries a fixed penalty of £60. Overfilling your dustbin will attract a fine of £100 or more from some councils; where's the logic in that? Sentencing Guidelines have become increasingly prescriptive. Average prison terms have increased significantly, but the programme of new prisons is only just starting to have effect, resulting in the recent farce of early release that was, surprise surprise, dropped just before the election was announced.
The Criminal Records culture has grown inexorably. Not too long ago, most offences became spent after a reasonable period of good behaviour, on the commendable principle that rehabilitation should be encouraged and recognised. Spurred on by the dreadful Soham murders more and more jobs require a CRB check. Employers can order the checks on the pretext that a driver, say, may deliver to an old people's home. If the enhanced check comes up with a 15 year-old shoplifting conviction, the employer won't take the man on. As a result there is now a substantial cadre of people whose unemployability is made absolute by the ease of access to the CRB. Twenty years ago the only way to get access to someone's record was to slip a few quid to a police officer (oh yes, it happened). Now it is routine.
The anti-terrorism laws have, as feared become widely abused to hamper legitimate activities. Jury trial, having been dispensed with once, will surely be dispensed with again. Every email and phone call will henceforth be stored for the authorities to look at when it suits them. Innocent people have their DNA retained if they are arrested and then released. Someone who is acquitted (as in Not Guilty) can nevertheless be slapped with a restraining order to prevent him repeating the offence that he has just been acquitted of - a new verdict of 'Not Guilty but Don't Do It Again'.
If any of you hears a single candidate addressing these issues, let me know. I bet you don't.

Don't Ask Me

A joint charge - one man, one boy. One 25, one 15 but looks younger. About eighty convictions between them, thirty down to the boy. The man looks at the bench with a lowering scowl. Domestic burglary of course. The man is a run of the mill local low-life criminal, and is off to the Crown Court to see what a jury makes of him.
Because we are sitting as an adult court and the boy is young we have limited powers to deal with the case and the lawyers need some time to sort out the procedure. We sit outside with some tea while they do so and my colleagues and I wonder just what anyone can do to make any difference with this out of control child who, child or not, is a menace to the local people we are there to protect. He has been born into and grown up among a large extended family among which the violent criminal young men are the role models, and to whom the police and any other kind of authority are sworn enemies.
So what can be done?
Have another look at this post's headline.

What's Going On Here Then?

This has turned up in my email from the MA:-

HMCS has issued the notice below regarding magistrates' allowances.
Magistrates Allowance Rates Revision 10/11

Due to unfortunate and unforeseen circumstance the review of this year’s rates has had to be temporarily delayed for a short period. HMCS expects to meet with the Magistrates' Association and National Bench Chairmen’s Forum in the week commencing 10th May 2010, to discuss rates.

"Unfortunate and unforseen"?
What can that be?
They only have to look at the rates once a year, and April 5th comes around in a predictable manner.

I shall put one of my informants on the case.

Running Scared

The Daily Mail appears to be beside itself with terror at the current surge in support for the Liberal Democrats. I have been an avid reader of the press since my teens, and I was in my element at university when I could settle down in the JCR after breakfast (in the unlikely event that I had got up early enough for breakfast) and fillet the whole of the national press. Now I can do it online before I go to bed.
Here's a cracker:

Nick Clegg in Nazi slur on Britain as he claims 'our delusions of grandeur' at winning war are more a cross to bear than German guilt

In other articles it appears that the Lib Dems are going to release 60,000 criminals onto the streets (aided by some really dodgy statistics) and there are many similar attacks that serve only to prove how desperate Dacre's men and women are becoming. As I said the other day, it's going to be an interesting couple of weeks.

That's A New One

I have agreed to do an extra sitting to cover for a colleague who is marooned in the Caribbean, due to the disruption of air travel.

I have been called into court for many different reasons over the years, but never before because of a volcano.

Well Hung

As I said the other day, this is not a political blog, but the criminal justice system has been overloaded with new laws for well over a decade now, and it is politicians who thought them up, if thought is not too strong a word.
Recent events seem to have increased the possibility of a hung parliament, and many members of the political class are claiming that this will prevent 'strong' government, whatever that means.
When you look at the unworkable and often useless laws foisted on us over the last generation, it is hard not to ask yourself just what is so bad about a system that makes it harder to ram laws through without proper debate and scrutiny. The attempted abolition of the centuries-old office of Lord Chancellor was hastily decided upon, and announced before those who actually understood the Constitution pointed out that things were not as simple as they looked. We still have a Lord Chancellor, albeit as a tacked-on title to the Stalinist sounding Minister of Justice. A senior policeman went to New York and came back enthusing about night courts. "Let's do that" came the reply from the Downing Street sofa. It never worked and was dropped. Community Courts were another dud idea from the States. Custody Plus was passed by Parliament but never implemented despite much money being spent on training. Would Margaret Thatcher have brought in the Poll Tax if she had been forced to argue it through, rather than swinging her handbag?
Whatever happens on May 6th I fervently hope that we will see the back of knee-jerk legislation, especially that which is driven by pressure from David Cameron's new pals in News International, who sometimes seem less like a media group than a wannabe political party.
It's going to be an interesting few weeks.

The All-Important Attitude Test

Bernard W has kindly sent me this link from the Daily Mail. These things sometimes happen, and I blogged about something similar here.
I think that the toy-car man failed what police officers refer to as the attitude test, having been invited to stop driving, but being in such a drunken state that he attempted to drive off after being warned. Every magistrate will have seen cases where the difference between a ticket and a finger-wagging is the suspect's behaviour towards police.
Humble pie is a most nourishing dish. I recommend it.