The courts and backlog of cases
Discussion
So since 2010, the government has closed over 250 courts pre pandemic. The Crown courts, which take less than ten per cent of the criminal cases, now has a backlog of over 56000.
The government told us the courts had to close due to lack of use and that cases would be seen quicker due to a billion pound upgrade of the system, especially the tech side and that people would not have to travel any more than hour to get the nearest court.
Has anyone had any bad experiences of extra waiting times due to their local court being shut down?
The government told us the courts had to close due to lack of use and that cases would be seen quicker due to a billion pound upgrade of the system, especially the tech side and that people would not have to travel any more than hour to get the nearest court.
Has anyone had any bad experiences of extra waiting times due to their local court being shut down?
I am a solicitor. Yes.
The uptake in technology did not happen. CV19 has forced the uptake in remote hearings since last year.
However the lack of investment is obvious when you see the state of the buildings and if you try and call the court. Ever tried that? Don't bother.
More recent issue is the lack of judges. Had numerous trials put off due to lack of judicial staff.
The uptake in technology did not happen. CV19 has forced the uptake in remote hearings since last year.
However the lack of investment is obvious when you see the state of the buildings and if you try and call the court. Ever tried that? Don't bother.
More recent issue is the lack of judges. Had numerous trials put off due to lack of judicial staff.
Our local Sheriff Court (Scotland) closed around 2016 because of cost cutting.
It was said that the court system had enough capacity to absorb this but it was obviously rubbish.
Within a few months there were complaints of cases backing up and endangering children and vulnerable adults.
It was obvious that a court that served 100k residents (increasing all the time) couldn't just shut down but the decision was made.
The annoying thing is that the people who make these decisions are never held accountable.
It’s not a lack of judges but an unwillingness to use them.
A friend in the golf club is a part time judge and was doing 2 or 3 days a week now 4 days a month.
This started before lockdown and he thought it might pick up in April but no
Last time we spoke he was doing cases from July 2019
A friend in the golf club is a part time judge and was doing 2 or 3 days a week now 4 days a month.
This started before lockdown and he thought it might pick up in April but no
Last time we spoke he was doing cases from July 2019
I think another problem is also the amount of time wasted in courts. Crown courts start trials at what, 10am? Hour for lunch. Then finish around 4pm. (They did, the one I worked in.) Also too much time taken picking jurors, a lot of waiting around twiddling thumbs and paperwork not being ready on time.
Drawweight said:
Our local Sheriff Court (Scotland) closed around 2016 because of cost cutting.
It was said that the court system had enough capacity to absorb this but it was obviously rubbish.
Within a few months there were complaints of cases backing up and endangering children and vulnerable adults.
It was obvious that a court that served 100k residents (increasing all the time) couldn't just shut down but the decision was made.
The annoying thing is that the people who make these decisions are never held accountable.
Is that the Scottish government? I think judicial responsibilities are devolved. Scotland has had it's own laws for aeons.It was said that the court system had enough capacity to absorb this but it was obviously rubbish.
Within a few months there were complaints of cases backing up and endangering children and vulnerable adults.
It was obvious that a court that served 100k residents (increasing all the time) couldn't just shut down but the decision was made.
The annoying thing is that the people who make these decisions are never held accountable.
It was a smoke and mirrors efficiency drive exercise by the MoJ. They realised they could make a fortune by selling off estate, throttling back on case which would deal with lack of prison spaces and save money on legal aid. It was a classic case of kicking the can down the road except it had the obvious effect anyone who actually works in the system identified. Then COVID happened which just made it even worse. It was bad before, now it’s beyond belief. Imagine being an eye witness/victim of a serious crime and having to wait two years to give evidence that may secure your assailants conviction and give you closure. I’m having to return to court for an arrest that occurred in 2017 and was charged in 2018.
Sgt Bilko said:
It was a smoke and mirrors efficiency drive exercise by the MoJ. They realised they could make a fortune by selling off estate, throttling back on case which would deal with lack of prison spaces and save money on legal aid. It was a classic case of kicking the can down the road except it had the obvious effect anyone who actually works in the system identified. Then COVID happened which just made it even worse. It was bad before, now it’s beyond belief. Imagine being an eye witness/victim of a serious crime and having to wait two years to give evidence that may secure your assailants conviction and give you closure. I’m having to return to court for an arrest that occurred in 2017 and was charged in 2018.
Your first sentence is very interesting as it just reminded me of the lean program they went on which pretty much started to decimate everything in its way. Why did it take so long to charge someone?! There was a senior prosecutor down here that was offered redundancy. She got around 80k for it. The CPS then rehired her as an agent as they were short staffed!!! flashbang said:
I think another problem is also the amount of time wasted in courts. Crown courts start trials at what, 10am? Hour for lunch. Then finish around 4pm. (They did, the one I worked in.) Also too much time taken picking jurors, a lot of waiting around twiddling thumbs and paperwork not being ready on time.
I disagree. The reason we start at 10 in all jurisdictions is because we all have to get to court there has to be a conference (meeting with the client) and generally counsel and solicitor need to ensure that witnesses are ready, papers are before the court etc. Most practitioners have normally been working on the case for 2 hours by the time the public turn up to a hearing. From experience I can tell you taht even finishing at 4pm means that I often end up not leaving work before 7-8pm. Prepping for the next day, catching up with emails and paperwork that came in while at court.
I can see why you say what you say, but as a barrister working in the courts (admittedly the civil ones, not crime) I can say that the reality of litigation is different.
I cannot say how much time gets wasted with disorderly paperwork in the criminal courts but I say you get what you pay for. You want a well functioning system someone has to fund it....
Read this book and all will be made clear to you:
http://www.keepcalmtalklaw.co.uk/book-review-stori...
It's not just criminal / civil that are suffering.
My wife represents CAFCASS guardians in childcare proceedings and they've seen a perfect storm over the last 12 months of overloaded guardians, a significant increase in at-risk children not getting seen by school staff (who provide a major safeguarding role), and smaller local courts being closed down.
Final hearings in cases are getting kicked down the kerb by the courts / local authorities because of worries that hearings held remotely are not giving parents fair process.
The result is the perpetuation of delay in getting positive outcomes for children. In the meantime the stories I hear of the conditions some of them live in are heart breaking. It's miserable work and by solicitors standards legal aid pay is crap. A high case load (and the associated stress) is the only way to make it viable. If she could switch careers she would, but what does a > 10 years qualified solicitor go and do without taking a massive pay cut?
My wife represents CAFCASS guardians in childcare proceedings and they've seen a perfect storm over the last 12 months of overloaded guardians, a significant increase in at-risk children not getting seen by school staff (who provide a major safeguarding role), and smaller local courts being closed down.
Final hearings in cases are getting kicked down the kerb by the courts / local authorities because of worries that hearings held remotely are not giving parents fair process.
The result is the perpetuation of delay in getting positive outcomes for children. In the meantime the stories I hear of the conditions some of them live in are heart breaking. It's miserable work and by solicitors standards legal aid pay is crap. A high case load (and the associated stress) is the only way to make it viable. If she could switch careers she would, but what does a > 10 years qualified solicitor go and do without taking a massive pay cut?
So much for justice being "timely" so people can move on with their lives.
I presume with such extended delays they have been reviewing remand? How gutted would you be if you spent several times the length of your sentance on remand due to court delays. Or worse still, are found innocent and basically did a couple years in prison for no reason.
I presume with such extended delays they have been reviewing remand? How gutted would you be if you spent several times the length of your sentance on remand due to court delays. Or worse still, are found innocent and basically did a couple years in prison for no reason.
Psycho Warren said:
So much for justice being "timely" so people can move on with their lives.
I presume with such extended delays they have been reviewing remand? How gutted would you be if you spent several times the length of your sentance on remand due to court delays. Or worse still, are found innocent and basically did a couple years in prison for no reason.
There was previously strict time limits of remand cases (called CTL - custody time limits) which were starting to crash the system as you could see those on remand having the effect of pushing back non remand but sometimes just as serious cases, but funnily enough COVID regs extended those limits. I presume with such extended delays they have been reviewing remand? How gutted would you be if you spent several times the length of your sentance on remand due to court delays. Or worse still, are found innocent and basically did a couple years in prison for no reason.
SteveScooby said:
I am police officer, more than a year ago I did a station breath test procedure for a drink driver. He’s pleaded not guilty, the case still hasn’t been heard, if he’d gone guilty the ban would have been served by now.
But on the flip side, he's managed to keep driving around in the meantime? And the case may never see the inside of a court room if they start binning cases to reduce the backlog?Edited by nordboy on Tuesday 23 February 18:18
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff