Evaluations of magistrates Magistrate (England and Wales)

1 evaluations of magistrates

1.1 composition of bench
1.2 public confidence
1.3 importance of local knowledge
1.4 cost , timeliness
1.5 legal adviser
1.6 few appeals
1.7 obliged give reasons
1.8 prosecution bias
1.9 inconsistency in sentencing
1.10 reliance on legal adviser

evaluations of magistrates

over last fifteen years, there have been number of research papers , reviews of role of magistrates, many observations being made:

composition of bench

magistrates have been perceived middle-class, middle-aged , middle-minded , has foundation in fact. judiciary in magistrates court (2000) report found magistrates overwhelmingly professional , managerial backgrounds , 40 percent of them retired full-time employment. majority of magistrates within 45-65 age range , appointment of magistrates under age of 30 still rare although there few notable exceptions. example, in 2006 19-year-old law student, lucy tate, appointed making britain s youngest magistrate.

in respect of other criteria, magistrates court reasonably balanced. 49 percent of magistrates women, in comparison 10 percent of professional judges. ethnic minorities reasonably represented. according national strategy recruitment of lay magistrates (2003), 6 percent of magistrates of ethnic minority background close 7.9 percent of population whole. again compares favourably professional judiciary has 1 percent membership ethnic minorities. comparatively high level of ethnic minorities in magistracy largely result of campaigns attract wider range of candidates, such launched lord chancellor s department in march 1999. in announcing campaign lord irvine stated:

typical recruitment campaigns have been supported local newspapers , magazines. in efforts target minorities adverts placed in publications such caribbean times, asian times , muslim news. lord chancellor encouraged disabled people apply , has resulted in appointment of blind magistrate.

the narrowness of magistrates backgrounds has been blamed on selection process magistrates on advisory committee tending appoint people similar backgrounds themselves. however, criticism has been ameliorated extent widening of advisory committee membership include non-magistrates.

the auld report (2001) commented unrealistic expect social composition of magistrates close of general population. partly because many people found difficult obtain support senior managers released magisterial duties, , because of other reasons relating employment. therefore, bench never true cross-section of society.

government figures published in 1995 showed conservative party bias among magistrates, although significance of finding inconclusive. 1979 study found there no appreciable difference in approach between different classes, conservative magistrates tend express harder attitude on sentencing. however, not established whether attitude reflected in sentencing decisions. in 1997, labour lord chancellor, lord irvine, called more labour magistrates appointed. labour government later concluded no longer necessary seek political balance on benches because people no longer voted along class lines. 1998 white paper stated: perhaps importantly, political balance, consultation paper attempts show, no longer acts guarantor or viable proxy someone’s position in society. historically voting class based, but, argued, no longer case.

public confidence

in report, professor rod morgan , neil russell demonstrated there lack of public understanding magistrates: 33% of public thought magistrates legally qualified. professor andrew sanders (sanders 2001) found low level of public confidence in magistrates courts based on british crime survey, mori poll , focus groups public , offenders. lord justice auld scathing these aspects of research, stating in report 1 thing rely on uninformed views of public guide may necessary engender public confidence, , rely on such views argument fashioning system meet them. public confidence not end in itself; or should outcome of fair , efficient system. proper approach make system fair , efficient and, if public ignorance stands in way of public confidence, take steps adequately demonstrate public so.

a number of initiatives have been formulated improve community relations: magistrates in community deals public relations @ local level, such presentations schools, colleges , community groups; national magistrates mock trial competition run in conjunction citizenship foundation involves schoolchildren in mock trial competitions; local crime , community sentence project. court open days organised majesty s courts , tribunals service method of engaging community. projects in place improve public confidence in criminal justice system (cjs) whole. british crime survey of september 2010 reported 61 per cent of adults thought cjs fair , 42 percent thought cjs effective.

the importance of local knowledge

the auld report noted local justice seen “a bridge between public , court system might otherwise appear remote”. however, locality encourage inconsistencies between areas , created risk of magistrates knowing defendants well. argument magistrates should have knowledge of local justice area still raised today, defence court closures. idea magistrates should local derives fact magistrates drawn area and, until courts act 2003, had live within 15 miles of commission area. in reality, magistrates may not have knowledge , understanding of area, poorer parts, because of them come professional , managerial classes , live in affluent areas. nevertheless, suggested have greater awareness of local events, local patterns of crime , local opinions professional judge area.

in case of paul v dpp (1989) court had decide whether kerb crawler ‘likely cause nuisance other persons in neighbourhood’. defendant convicted on basis magistrates knew kerb crawling problem in residential area. on appeal lord justice woolf noted case magistrate’s local knowledge had been useful.

cost , timeliness

the use of unpaid magistrates cost effective, in terms of cost , timeliness, saving tax payer high cost of employing full-time judges. report judiciary in magistrates court (2000) found @ time cost of using lay magistrates £52.10 per hour compared cost of using stipendiary @ £61.90 hour. in 2010, offence-to-completion time defendants case committed or sent trial @ crown court average of 187 days. estimated average offence-to-completion time in magistrates courts indictable/triable either-way offences 109 days same period. cost of trial in magistrates court cheaper cost in crown court both government , defendants pay own legal costs. however, should remembered crown court deals more complex , lengthy cases magistrates court.

legal adviser

the issue of legal qualifications of legal advisers has come under scrutiny in recent years.

following reforms in 1999, legal advisers required legally qualified. existing legal advisers under age of 40 in 1999 required gain legal qualification within 10 years. assistants justices’ clerks regulations 2006, in regulation 3, set out qualifications assistants justices’ clerks employed clerks in court. provided people have qualified barristers or solicitors , had passed exams either of professions or had been granted exemption qualified assistants justices’ clerks meant can carry out matters on behalf of justices’ clerk. 2006 regulations enabled lord chancellor make temporary appointments of people act clerks in court satisfied were, in circumstances, suitable , no other arrangement can reasonably made.

however, assistants justices clerks (amendment) regulations 2007 replaced regulation 3 of 2006 regulations. effect clarify those: i. in employment assistant registered law society under regulation 23 of training regulations 1990; ii. held valid training certificate granted magistrates courts committee before 1 january 1999; or iii. acted clerk in court before 1 january 1999 , qualified act such under justices’ clerk (qualification of assistants) rules 1979 (as amended) carry out duties of assistant clerks can act; act clerks in court.

these changes have brought greater degree of professionalism magistrates courts, helping magistrates in dealing points of law , procedure. furthermore, training of magistrates has become more consistent involvement of judicial studies board.

few appeals

comparatively few appeals made against decisions made magistrates court, , majority made against sentence rather verdict. judicial statistics annual report (2006) showed 12,992 appeals made crown court magistrates court. of these 2,020 allowed , 3,184 resulted in variation of sentence, out of total of 2 million defendants dealt in magistrates court. there few appeals allowed because error of law made. shown fact 100 appeals allowed way of case stated queen s bench divisional court, of these 42 allowed. in 2008, there 72 appeals, on point of law, queen’s bench division, of 30 allowed.

obliged give reasons

the human rights act 1998 imported european convention on human rights english law. article 6 of convention gives accused right fair trial. implicit in right requirement magistrates give reasons decisions, unlike jury verdicts in crown court.

prosecution bias

one criticism of magistrates courts have high conviction rates in comparison jury trials in crown court because, suggested, magistrates have bias in favour of prosecution. unsurprisingly, in 1982 study commissioned home office, found direct evidence prosecution witnesses credibility not challenged led high level of convictions. weaknesses in prosecution case, such unreliable witness evidence, lack of confessions or direct evidence against defendant led higher likelihood of acquittal. however, in cases defendant s credibility not demonstrably undermined, there conviction rate of 63 percent. in majority of these cases, there first-hand evidence (mainly police witnesses) of defendant s behaviour criminal intent inferred.

since inauguration of crown prosecution service in 1986, proportion of weaker prosecution cases has declined result of cps review function requires realistic prospect of conviction before prosecution can commenced or continued. in 2009, conviction rate of defendants tried in magistrates’ courts offences 98% , in crown court, 80%.

one contributor lord justice auld s review of criminal courts of england , wales (2001) drew attention dichotomy in people s attitudes towards magistracy, according whether considering elective right trial jury in either-way cases or relative advantages of lay , professional judges in summary cases. on former issue magistrates portrayed part of establishment, being used deny defendants basic human right; on latter depicted near equivalent of jury - peers of people appear before them, ordinary people experience of real world, bringing common sense bear etc.

the need magistrates demonstrate impartiality in criminal trials emphasised in case of bingham justices ex p jowitt (1974). motorist charged exceeding speed limit , evidence contradictory, in form of statements of defendant , police officer. defendant found guilty , chairman stated “my principle in such cases has been believe police officer”. conviction quashed on appeal magistrates demonstrated bias.

inconsistency in sentencing

it has been demonstrated magistrates in different regions have passed different sentences appear similar offences. government s white paper, justice set out differences found in criminal sentencing in magistrates court.

for burglary of dwellings in teesside, 20 percent of offenders sentenced immediate custodial sentence, compared 41 percent in birmingham; 38 percent of burglars in cardiff magistrates court received community sentences compared 66 percent in leicester.
for driving while disqualified, percentage of offenders sentenced custody ranged 21 percent in neath port talbot (south wales) 77 percent in mid north essex.
for receiving stolen goods, 3.5 percent of offenders sentenced in reading magistrates court received custodial sentences compared 48 percent in greenwich , woolwich , 39 percent in camberwell green.

statistics published in 2004 showed no improvement. example, magistrates in sunderland discharged 36.4 percent of defendants in comparison birmingham discharged 9.2 percent of defendants. in newcastle magistrates sentenced 7.2 percent immediate custodial sentence whereas in hillingdon figure 32 percent.

the prison reform trust report on sentencing (2009–2010) highlighted number of issues including following:

youth courts in merthyr tydfil issued custodial terms on 20 percent of sentences on period, highest in england , wales, , ten times equivalent rate in newcastle.
case hardening: can argued magistrates susceptible finding on time circumstances not shocking , passing sentences becomes less of big issue leading more cynical approach.

however, when statistics put in context, may not appear severe might @ first glance. 4 percent of offenders dealt magistrates receive prison sentence. furthermore, in effort bring greater degree of consistency sentencing, national guidelines have been issued magistrates , updated on regular basis. these sentencing guidelines issued under aegis of sentencing council aims improve sentencing practice in criminal courts.

reliance on legal adviser

the lack of legal knowledge of magistrates should offset fact legally qualified clerk available. suggested that, in courts, magistrates place reliance on clerk, extent few cases have been quashed on appeal. example, in r v birmingham magistrates ex parte ahmed [1995], defendant accused of deception , handling. when magistrates retired consider verdict, clerk joined them. since there no point of law arising, created suspicion taking part in deciding verdict, , therefore verdict quashed. in case of r v eccles justices, ex parte farrelly (1992) queen s bench divisional court quashed convictions because clerk had apparently assisted , participated in decision making process. in r v sussex justices, ex parte mccarthy (1924), motorcyclist involved in road accident resulted in prosecution before magistrates court dangerous driving. unknown defendant , solicitor, clerk member of firm of solicitors acting in civil claim against defendant arising out of accident had given rise prosecution. clerk retired magistrates, returned convict defendant. on learning of clerk s provenance, defendant applied have conviction quashed. magistrates swore affidavits stating had reached decision convict defendant without consulting clerk.