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
'BSB report finds technology adoption at the bar lags behind large law firms'
Barristers are more reluctant than solicitors to take up new technology, the Bar Standards Board has revealed. A report published today, Technology and Innovation at the Bar, identifies ‘significant barriers’ to the effective adoption of technologies such as large language model artificial intelligence. The study, which included a literature review and interviews with stakeholders as well as practitioners, found ‘unlike law firms, there is limited centralisation of documents and data, and therefore less benefit to implementation’. It added: ‘Law firms can quickly see the relevance of an AI [large language model] tool improving when it works across a single large database of legal content whereas barristers don’t have a large central data repository on which to train and test LLMs...
The report's recommendations to the regulator include encouraging collaboration and standardisation, educating and informing barristers with a list of technology providers as well as guidance on how to adopt technology and providing a roadmap for development and implementation of technology at the bar...
'Joint enterprise: lawyers invited to submit evidence to Westminster inquiry'
Solicitors are being urged to submit evidence to a landmark review of joint enterprise amid long-standing concerns that the common law doctrine unfairly targets young black men and people from other minority groups. The Westminster Commission on Joint Enterprise, set up last year by the all-party parliamentary group on miscarriages of justice, is probing the law, practice and policy of joint enterprise, which allows multiple people to be prosecuted and punished for the same crime.
The commission is being overseen by Labour peer Lord Woodley (the trade unionist Tony Woodley) and co-chaired by law lecturers Dr Louise Hewitt, founder of the Innocent Project London, and Dr Bharat Malkani, a specialist on race and justice. The commission has been holding oral evidence sessions but is now seeking written evidence on how joint enterprise on the purpose and effectiveness of joint enterprise, how it is applied in practice and perceived benefits of the current legal framework...
'Sex offenders to be denied asylum rights in new law'
Asylum seekers will be denied the right to stay in the UK if they have been convicted of sexual offences, the government has announced. Terrorists, war criminals and any other criminals whose offences carry a sentence of one year or more can already be refused asylum under the Refugee Convention. Under the changes, this will be extended to anyone convicted in the UK of a crime which places them on the sex offenders register, regardless of the length of their sentence. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said this would "ensure these appalling crimes are taken seriously" but the Conservatives said the measures were "too little, too late". The changes will be introduced through an amendment to the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Bill, which is currently making its way through Parliament...
'Public bodies review: Ministry of Justice says Legal Aid Agency remains useful and necessary'
The Ministry of Justice conducted a three-month review last year on whether the Legal Aid Agency was 'useful and necessary' – and concluded that it was, it has emerged. The review of the executive agency was carried out between August and November last year. A summary of the findings was published this week. The review was carried out to 'provide assurance' that the LAA’s functions 'remain useful and necessary', that the LAA is effective, efficient and aligned to government priorities, and that it is well governed and properly accountable... The summary said the LAA and ministry are compliant with the Cabinet Office ‘good practice indicators’ for departments and public bodies. Areas of ‘strong compliance’ included outcomes for citizens, financial management and transparency...
'UK-Nigeria partnership to detect, disrupt and deter fraud'
The public will be better protected from fraud as law enforcement collaboration between the UK and Nigeria is stepped up under a new joint fraud action plan agreed between the two countries today. The partnership will provide increased protection for victims by focusing on earlier detection of threats, faster law enforcement intervention, and the disruption of cross-border criminal networks before they can cause harm. It will also support stronger systems to help prevent people from falling victim to fraud in the first place...
Cases
R v ALJ [2024] EWCA Crim 1600
... The prosecution case was that the appellant sexually abused C, who was effectively his stepdaughter, when she was between the ages of 13 and 15, having groomed her by befriending her, getting drunk with her, supplying her with drugs at her request (on one occasion) and forming an inappropriate emotional bond over mental health and other issues. To prove the case the prosecution relied upon C’s evidence and upon evidence from friends and relatives of C, including complaint evidence and behaviour that the witnesses had seen. The defence case was a straightforward and outright denial. He had never touched C in a sexual way. He gave evidence that he did not lie down with C on the sofa and touch her, did not provide her with drugs, did not expose himself to her and did not make any sexual comments. Whilst they would cuddle on the sofa, it was not in an intimate way and they were never in bed together at any house...
... We accept that there may be cases where a court is obliged to sum up an issue that the parties themselves have not raised - provocation in a murder case is an example. We also accept that some judges would sum up the issue of consent, even if only briefly, even in a case such as this where the issue has not been raised in the course of the trial in any shape or form. However, we are far from persuaded that the judge in the present case was required to sum up the issue of consent for the simple reason that it was not in issue. Apart from the bald statement that the Crown was put to strict proof of each of the elements of the offence with which the appellant was charged, the Defence Statement said nothing about consent or any alternative case being an issue. Thereafter, it may have been acceptable not to put an alternative case to C if the intention was to submit at half time that there was no evidence upon which a jury could properly be satisfied that C had not consented or that the appellant had not reasonably believed that she had consented. That was never an option here because C’s uncontradicted evidence clearly supported the conclusion that she did not consent and that the appellant did not reasonably believe that she did. Wisely, Ms White did not make such a submission either at half-time or later. Had she done so, she would have been bound to fail...
Given that there was clear evidence upon which (to put it at its lowest for the moment) a properly directed jury could reasonably have concluded adversely to the appellant on the issue of consent, if the appellant wished to run the alternative case, he was obliged to put that case to C. Simple fairness to C could not be satisfied with anything less. It would then be a decision for the appellant whether he wished to challenge C’s evidence by evidence of his own, which would in the circumstances have been a difficult tactical decision for him to take but would have been the consequence of his decision to run a secondary line of defence as a fallback if his primary defence failed. As it was, by the end of the trial, C’s evidence was unchallenged in any respect material to the issue of consent. In our judgment, her unchallenged evidence could only lead to one conclusion on the issue of consent. We have no doubt that is why, in circumstances where nothing had been done by the appellant or on his behalf to indicate that consent was even contingently in issue, the judge was of the view, correctly in our judgment, that consent simply was not in issue. His summary that if the jury were satisfied that touching occurred as described by C then it would constitute the offence of sexual assault was correct and sufficient...
Education
'Measuring Sentence Inflation in England and Wales'
The Sentencing Academy has published a new analysis, authored by Jose Pina-Sánchez, Julian V. Roberts and Jonathan Bild, of sentence inflation in England and Wales since 2005...
We estimate that since 2005, sentence severity has increased by 62%, while the seriousness of crimes processed through courts has increased by only 8%. This means that 87% of the increased sentence severity over the period was due to changes in sentencing practice, or as we term it, ‘sentence inflation’. Put differently, we estimate that sentencing in England and Wales is today 54% more punitive than in 2005. This is the first analysis to provide an estimate of the overall degree of sentence inflation in this or any other jurisdiction. Our analysis reveals that sentence inflation has been far from uniform. Whereas no discernible pattern can be detected for drug offences, or public order offences, sentence severity for offences involving violence or weapons related offences has doubled since 2005. Sentence severity for fraud offences has tripled...