Issue 321  25th November 2023

Chancellor Jeremy Hunt has been accused of ignoring the legal sector as he outlined his vision for the nation’s economy. Hunt delivered his autumn statement today including a cut in national insurance contributions and an 8.5% increase in the state pension. But measures specifically aimed at the legal sector were largely absent and the Treasury revealed later that justice spending will be unchanged at £10bn from 2023/24 to 2024/25. This is effectively a real terms cut, given that inflation is currently around 4.6% and the Office for Budget Responsibility predicts that it will not come down to 2% until the second quarter of 2025...

Nick Emmerson, Law Society president, said: ‘While it is great news for business that full expensing has been made permanent, it is disappointing that parts of the legal services sector have once again been overlooked. Our call for the scheme to be expanded to include all law firms has gone unheard’... Emmerson said the government had missed the chance to invest in a legal services sector that needs support to continue to be an economic powerhouse. ‘No new money was announced for a justice system crying out for investment despite it being in crisis with huge court backlogs, crumbling court buildings and a chronic shortage of lawyers and judges,’ he added. ‘Investment is needed right now to ensure access to justice remains open to everyone.’

Police, banks and social media platforms are failing to tackle the growing crime of romance fraud, leaving victims without justice and “banging their heads against a wall”, MPs have been told. Giving evidence to the home affairs select committee inquiry into fraud, two female victims described their experiences of being groomed, abused and scammed online.

Cecilie Fjellhøy, who featured in the 2022 Netflix “true crime” documentary Tinder Swindler, told the inquiry on Wednesday that trying to get social media companies to act against romance scams was “like you are banging your head against a wall”. She described how she was scammed out of almost £200,000 by Simon Leviev, who romanced her on the online dating platform and trapped her into a scam using elaborate lies about how he was in danger and needed money urgently. She told the committee that even though Leviev was jailed for his crimes for two years he had now been released and was alleged to be committing further crimes in Germany...

Fraud is the biggest crime area in England and Wales, with an estimated 3.3m fraud offences committed in the year ending June 2023. This year fraud is likely to cost UK households more than £1bn.

My overall conclusion is that there is no need to legislate for any amendments to terrorism legislation now, and good reason for caution. It is difficult to identify any real situations where a gap in terrorism legislation means that terrorist mischief cannot currently be addressed by arrest and prosecution. Given the number of pro-Palestine marchers, there have been plenty of opportunities for gaps to become apparent. There may well be other mischiefs (such as anti-Semitism) but those are not a subject for terrorism legislation. It is possible to formulate hypothetical situations where certain words used might, arguably, fall outside terrorism legislation. However, to legislate for hypotheticals would be bad practice: the success of UK terrorism legislation is that it adapts in response to real terrorist harm. I am also conscious that if speculative examples were given by me (or during Parliamentary debates) of forms of words potentially falling outside terrorism legislation, it might inspire bad actors to use those forms of words, before amending legislation could be brought into force. There is a general risk of legislating in response to one set of protests because of the risk of unintended consequences when new legislation comes to be applied to other protests. Finally, I am conscious that real cases are currently before the courts. Where the edges of the current law are being tested out it would be premature to conclude that reform is necessary...

An armed policeman who crashed while racing to the scene of a terrorist stabbing attack in south London has been cleared of dangerous driving. PC Paul Fisher, 46, made a "split-second error" when he lost control of a Met Police unmarked BMW X5 on the way to Streatham. Southwark Crown Court heard PC Fisher admitted he "let people down" but denied dangerous driving.

Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley branded the prosecution "appalling". The court heard how PC Fisher reached speeds of more than 80mph (129km/h). His vehicle ran into the back of a taxi before hitting another car and a wall, the court heard. Three people escaped with minor injuries in the crash. The police car did not have its blue lights on at the time because they had accidentally been switched off by one of the occupants, the jury heard.

Speaking outside the court following the verdict, Sir Mark said the case "undermines the confidence of all officers using their powers to keep the public safe". He added: "No other country in the world would haul one of its most highly trained officers before a court for responding to one of the most serious incidents we can deal with and doing their utmost to preserve life"...

We were commissioned by Lancashire’s Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) Andrew Snowden to conduct an independent review into the investigation of reported missing person Nicola Bulley in February 2023... We reviewed over 350 documents, emails and phone records, interviewed more than 70 key people from Lancashire Constabulary and gained insight from over 30 subject matter experts outside the force, including those from the media.

Key findings

• There were unprecedented levels of mainstream and social media interest in the case.
• The police investigation and search was very well conducted by Lancashire Constabulary.
• The decision not to call the investigation a critical incident, despite it meeting the national definition, set the tone within the constabulary and led to several challenges.
• Media handling and communication of information to the public, and the management of this by the leadership team, led to a breakdown of public confidence.
• Despite being lawful, the release of personal details regarding Nicola was avoidable and unnecessary.
• The relationship between the police and mainstream media needs to be rebuilt.