About
A free weekly collection of criminal law links - for practitioners, law students, and anyone with an interest in the criminal justice system of England and Wales.
Curated by Sam Willis, a barrister at 5 King's Bench Walk.
News
'In depth: General election manifesto roundup'
The three main parties agree that criminal justice needs fixing - but differ on priorities...
Conservatives - Publishing the manifesto, prime minister Rishi Sunak said a new Conservative government would recruit 8,000 new police officers, cut anti-social behaviour through ‘intensive hot spot policing’... Cut the ‘Covid court backlog’ by keeping Nightingale courtrooms open, funding sitting days and investing in court maintenance, match 100 criminal law pupillages ‘to speed up justice for victims’; and ‘continue to ensure access to justice through legal aid provision’.
Labour - A Labour government would expand the role of associate prosecutors as an initial step to tackling the court backlog... Associate prosecutors (APs) work in-house for the Crown Prosecution Service and can currently conduct uncontested cases in the magistrates’ courts. Some suitably trained APs are able to conduct specified contested hearings at present, up to and including trials of summary-only non-imprisonable offences. The manifesto does not state on which other kinds of ‘appropriate cases’ APs might be permitted to work... The manifesto also pledges to carry out a review of court sentencing powers ‘to ensure it is brought up to date’ and to fast-track rape cases by introducing specialist courts at every Crown court location in England and Wales. The party claims it could reallocate £5m to appoint advocates to provide free legal advice and support to rape survivors across England and Wales. Labour also said it would introduce a new criminal offence for spiking drinks as well as a ‘Hillsborough Law’ to place a legal duty of candour on public servants and authorities. Revenue of £565m raised by closing a carried interest tax loophole would enable £30m to be deployed to legal aid for victims of disasters or state-related deaths...
Liberal Democrats - An ambition to halve the time from offence to sentencing for all criminals forms part of justice plans set out in the Lib Dem manifesto. The party said it would implement a new data strategy across the criminal justice system to ensure that capacity meets demand. There would also be a workforce strategy to ensure there are enough criminal barristers, judges and court staff. In a move towards greater transparency, the party would enable all victims of crime to request a transcript of court proceedings free of charge. The party pledges to develop and implement a comprehensive race equality strategy to address what it calls ‘deep inequalities’ in areas such as criminal justice... The party would introduce the Hillsborough Law: a statutory duty of candour on police officers and all public officials, including during all forms of public inquiry and criminal investigation.
'Justice reform charity unveils post-election criminal justice action plan'
Prisoners serving shorter sentences would be released earlier and less serious cases would be heard by the magistrates' courts under a criminal justice action plan prepared by a justice reform charity for the next government. Phil Bowen, director of the Centre for Justice Innovation, said the next lord chancellor will face 'a set of challenges more daunting than any witnessed in a generation' and urgent action will be required to stave off an 'imminent' prisons crisis. The centre has been a driving force behind the widely-praised family drug and alcohol courts.
To free up potentially thousands of prison beds a year, prisoners serving a sentence of four years or less would be released after serving 40% of their sentence, instead of the current 50% (prisoners serve the rest of their sentence on supervised licence). District judges in the magistrates' court would hear cases where the defendant faces up to two years in prison - a move that could reduce the Crown court workload by one-fifth of existing Crown court receipts. 'Administrative' cases such as TV licence evasion would move to the civil courts...
Separately, the Magistrates Association has also identified six post-election priorities. These include investing in a wider range of community sentence options, reviewing the potential for magistrates’ courts to take on greater work and reforming the Single Justice Procedure.
'Roughly 75,000 fare evasion prosecutions may be quashed as they are 'probably unlawful'
Around 75,000 criminal prosecutions brought by train companies against passengers in controversial fast-track courts were “probably unlawful” and could now be quashed. Alleged fare dodgers can be taken to court through the Single Justice Procedure (SJP) - a process where magistrates convict and sentence defendants in private hearings – if they are accused of breaching a railway byelaw. But 2016 legislation which set up the SJP courts did not permit rail firms – as private prosecutors - to use the Regulation of Railways Act 1889 in the special fast-track court process. An Evening Standard investigation last week revealed that vast numbers of criminal cases had unlawfully been brought against alleged fare dodgers in this way between 2020 and 2024.
Chief Magistrate Paul Goldspring has now stepped in to deal with the mess, after private crisis talks between the Department for Transport, court officials, and train companies. He indicated he could now cancel all the convictions, and warned that train companies would have to decide how to tackle fines that have already been paid and bailiff action brought as a result of unlawful prosecutions. “My initial view which has crystalised over a week of research is that all of the offences not covered by the 2016 order and prosecuted in the Single Justice Procedure are void and therefore a nullity”, he told a hearing at Westminster magistrates court on Thursday, revealing that at least 74,860 criminal cases are believed to be involved. The senior judge ordered the train firms involved, including government-owned Northern Rail and Greater Anglia, to decide if they are challenging his view, ahead of a final hearing on July 19...
A Notice issued by HMCTS, the Department for Transport and the Ministry of Justice can be found here.
'Prisons in England and Wales will be at ‘breaking point’ in July, governors told'
Prison governors have been warned that jails will be so overcrowded by the second week of July that they will struggle to accept any more inmates, plunging an incoming government into an immediate crisis. The heads of jails in England and Wales were informed by HM Prison and Probation Service officials earlier this month that data pointed to an “operational capacity breaking point” only days after the 4 July general election.
The development signals a significant logistical headache for an incoming justice secretary. It is expected to trigger Operation Early Dawn, a crisis measure that allows offenders to be housed in police cells when jails are full, while other measures can prompt magistrates courts to delay cases. The measures are in addition to a temporary government scheme under which prisoners can be released up to 70 days early...
Professional Users’ Access Scheme Changes
Following our most recent review, we are writing to tell you that we plan to introduce an adapted search policy for those who are part of the Professional Users’ Access Scheme (PUAS). The changes provide further privileged, fast track access to PUAS members who are all subject to strong access control authentication processes of the scheme, while maintaining the safety and security of everyone in the building...
At the limited number of courts where, for security reasons, we are unable to offer the PUAS (including Woolwich Crown and Westminster Magistrates’) whilst all PUAS members will still be required to undergo a search, searches of PUAS-authenticated members will follow the adapted process as now set out.
The changes will come into effect at two early adopter sites - Woolwich Crown Court and Westminster Magistrates’ Court – from Tuesday 18 June 2024 and Thursday 20 June 2024 respectively. Following this, we will continue to rollout across our sites as and when security guards are fully trained in how to conduct the adapted search. Training will also include implementing improvements around the terminology and language used when conducting searches and when asking security-related questions. For courts and tribunals outside the two early adopter sites, members will be informed locally when the adapted security searches will be in place at their building. We will roll the new process out as quickly as we can across England and Wales, starting in July 2024.
Cases
Grier v DPP [2024] EWHC 1493 (Admin)
... This is an appeal by way of case stated from District Judge Verghis sitting in the Magistrates' Court on 30 November 2023. The issue relates to the admissibility under s.78 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 ("PACE") of identification evidence of an eye-witness police officer in circumstances where no "identification procedure" under PACE Code D, Code of Practice for the Identification of Persons by Police Officers ("Code D") took place...
... It follows then that for the obligation to conduct an identification process to be triggered at the very least the suspect must dispute identity – and when that happens may well depend on the facts. We do not by any means say that the dispute must be by way of a formal or even an express statement. The dispute may be one which is made plain in some other way – which is something which is to be inferred from all the circumstances. For example, a defendant might put forward a case which was inconsistent with him being the person suspected; so a person in Mr Grier's position might dispute being the driver by ringing the police and telling them that his car was stolen before the time in question. In a case such as this it may or may not be the case that identity is in dispute prior to an interview or arrest, such that an obligation to hold an identification procedure could arise. That is essentially what happened in Nunes... But Nunes also makes clear that it was not setting down a general rule... In this case in particular there is nothing in the material before us which could provide a factual basis upon which it could properly be said that "the suspect disputes being the person the eye witness claims to have seen" so as to make this case analogous with Nunes and engage paragraph 3.12 of Code D. There is no evidence to suggest that the backdrop to the Appellant's arrival had included any dispute about who was driving the car prior to it being abandoned or any volunteering by him of a case that he had not been driving. As the District Judge noted at [32] of the case stated, the Appellant did not dispute the identification on arrest. He did not dispute the identification in interview, choosing instead to give a full no comment interview... We therefore accept the Respondent's submission that on the facts of this case, there was no requirement under Code D to hold a formal identification procedure...