Monday Message 21.10.24
Criminal barristers have read with disbelief and sadness another headline grabbing, knee-jerk “solution,” to the crisis in the criminal justice system. From mid-November, Magistrates will be able to sentence offenders for a single either-way offence (one where the defendant can elect trial by jury) to a maximum of 12 months imprisonment. The previous maximum was 6 months. Bear in mind that 12 months does not mean 12 months. Now (even without any credit for a guilty plea) it means 20 weeks imprisonment and the rest on licence supervised by an already overstretched probation service whose numbers cannot increase sufficiently quickly to manage all these extra people.
Sentences of 12 months and under usually apply in cases of theft, possession of drugs, driving offences and minor public order offences where violence is threatened, not used.
The Ministry of Justice are trumpeting this ‘solution” as a means to enable victims to get “Swifter Justice.” They fail to mention that this scheme has already been tried and failed. Why? Well we know from statistical research that short sentences of imprisonment do not work. They fill up the already full prisons with short-term prisoners who can receive no rehabilitation work and who are released without a place to live, a job to go to or any skills to change their habits. The rate of re-offending following short prison sentences is over 58%. The rate of re-offending if community orders are imposed is about 24%. The cost of imprisoning each of these offenders is about £26,000. “Swifter Justice” is not in the public interest if it leads to further re-offending.
The last attempt to grasp this nettle was in 2022-2023. The then Government considered bringing into law a rule that, except for violent offenders, no one should receive an immediate prison sentence of this length at all. This idea was shelved because there were concerns that, with an election looming, it would not be well received by the public.
Victims of significant violence and sexual offences will rarely fall into the bracket of having cases where the penalty is likely to be 12 months or less, unless there has been under charging to get cases completed quickly (something that is unlikely to happen now that the focus is on the victims of crime).
In this new scheme, even if the case is one that can be dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court, an accused person has a right to elect trial. If the idea is that there can be speedy trials in the Magistrates’ Courts it is worth remembering that there is a backlog of over 382,972 cases in the Magistrates’ Court alone, with too few magistrates (13,340 rather than 17,000), too few court legal advisors, and criminal solicitors are leaving the profession in droves. The most recent survey of the Magistrates’ Courts in April 2024 portrayed overworked and over-burdened Crown Prosecutors and Criminal Solicitors who, in the opinion of the authors of the report, had far too many cases to prepare them properly and thoroughly. Swift does not necessarily mean good. The Magistrates’ Association conference in November sums up the response of us all. It is titled “Solutions not sticking plasters.”
The “swift justice” scheme does not differentiate between guilty pleas and trials. If an accused denies the offence then they are likely to choose to be tried by a jury. If the accused wants to delay the conclusion of the case they are also likely to elect trial by jury and sit in the backlog of over 75,000 cases waiting for a trial. By the time that the trial is reached, the witnesses may well have decided not to continue or, if the accused has not re-offended, the sentence imposed years after an event will inevitably be lower.
The increase in sentencing powers is highly likely to quickly increase the prison population to an unmanageable number, increase appeals against sentence and/or conviction. It is likely to increase the number of people committing offences on our streets.
We are told this measure will free up 2,000 days in the Crown Court for sitting. We already have capacity for a further 2,000 sitting days in the Crown Court. Just last week, 500 court rooms stood empty to save money. These are the court rooms that would be used for rape trials, fraud trials, offences of serious violence. We are just not using them because the Government is not willing or able to put their money into actually providing swifter justice for victims of serious crime. The statistics keep changing, as does the message. We have no confidence that we are being provided with full and frank information so we now rely on what the court lists show, real evidence, rather than statistics. Today in Snaresbrook Crown Court 5 out of 20 court rooms which are available for use lie empty. Snaresbrook has been a stellar example of a court which has bucked the trend by managing to reducing its backlog of cases. The Resident Judge had developed a pro-active plan working with the court staff, criminal barristers and solicitors and all court users which reduced its backlog by 13%. Now, it will increase again. Today, Southwark Crown Court which primarily focuses on serious fraud trials has 4 of its 16 Crown Courts closed.
We also learn in the press (as many changes are announced to us, without consultation) that there is to be a board led by David Gauke to consider sentencing moving forward. Despite our repeated offers to help the government in such schemes we understand that there will not be a representative of the criminal bar on that board. We have offered to help for free. The lack of respect for us is palpable.
Every actual participant in the criminal justice system has the same desire. Instead of dealing with the latest crisis, we want to fix the criminal justice system that used to be the envy of the world. Please listen to the people who work in the system. We urge the government and its agencies to listen to those who work every day in this system, Police, Magistrates, Criminal Solicitors, Crown Prosecution Service, Court Staff, Criminal Barristers, Judges, Probation Officers and Prison Officers. If you want to change things for the better please work with us to mend the broken heart of this system. No more sticking plasters. No more lurching from crisis to crisis. Invest whilst you still can. Please listen.
And finally, the Annual Pupillage Fair took place in London over the weekend with members of the CBA in attendance. I wish to thank the following for all they did to promote the Criminal Bar on Saturday: Grace Ong, Clara Sibanda, Felicity Davy and Becky Glenn.
Yours,
Mary Prior KC
Chair of The Criminal Bar Association.