Comparative Analysis of Observed Proceedings in Brent Magistrates Court and Southwark Crown Court - Essay Example

Observations of Proceedings in Magistrates’ and Crown Courts A Report on the Comparative Analysis of Observed Proceedings in Brent Magistrates’ Court and Southwark Crown Court Introduction Administration of justice is critical in all the justice systems across the world. Generally, administration of justice concentrates on the criminal justice system, its public and legal policy contexts, as well as its organizational processes and components (Davis et al, 2011, p. 8). This includes public attitudes about criminal justice issues, instruction in policy and law, judiciary and administration of justice, and police and organizations of correction systems (Savage and Bretherwick, 2011, p. 15). In the United Kingdom (UK), just like in many common law jurisdictions across the world, criminal and civil courts are responsible for administration of justice (Newburn, 2007, p. 12). The UK courts apply English Law, that is, the law of England and Wales established under the UK’s Acts of Parliament. Courts of England and Wales include the County Courts, the Magistrate’s Courts, the Crown Courts, the High Courts, the Court of Appeal, and the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. All these courts have been given specific powers that define the calibre of cases that are heard and adjudicated upon in these courts (Ashworth and Redmayne, 2005, p. 23). This discussion focuses on the Magistrate and Crown Courts. The discussion provides a comparative analysis of these two types of courts based on observations made during the visit to each of these courts. The observations in this discussion are based on visits to Brent Magistrates’ Court (Magistrate Court) and Southwark Crown Court (Crown Court. In particular, the essay compares the differences between these two courts and evaluates the administration of justice within both courts. In addition, the essay provides details on the respective roles of these courts in dispensing justice. Descriptions of Courts i) Magistrates’ Court In order to provide a comprehensive comparative analysis of both courts, it is important to provide a description of each court. To begin with, Magistrates’ Courts are the lower tier of the criminal court system. Cases in these courts are heard by either a District Judge or three lay magistrates. Davies et al (2011, p. 50) states that under the powers defined by statute, these courts usually dispense summary justice. They deal with minor offences whose imprisonments are up to 6 months and a fine of up to £5,000. However, a prison sentence of up to 12 months can be imposed by these courts if the accused is found guilty of more than one summary offence. Newburn (2007, p. 26) explains that Magistrates’ Courts can also deal with more serious crimes which are commonly known as ‘either way’ offences; these offences may include drug offences, burglary, and handling of stolen goods. These courts handle the bulk of UK’ cases; it is estimated that more than 95 percent of the criminal cases are handled under this jurisdiction (Sanders, Young and Burton, 2010, p. 79). The court has a legal adviser who ensures that the right procedures of the court are followed and the business of the Court is dealt with accordingly and efficiently. Legal advisers must provide neutral advice on legal matters and should not influence the Bench. Besides, it is worth noting that Magistrates’ Courts cases are in most cases prosecuted by Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). A representative of CPS is always present in Magistrates’ Court to prosecute available cases (Savage and Bretherwick, 2011, p. 28). However, a small number of cases are usually prosecuted through other law enforcement agencies such as Health and Safety Executive, the Department for Work and Pensions, HM Revenue and Customs, or by private prosecutors where barrister will attend court cases to prosecute (Newburn, 2007, p. 61). Since these courts deal with minor offences, defendants are often entitled to defend themselves. Usually, defendants are represented by a barrister; there are duty barristers who are available to represent defendants who do not have their own. In regard to summons, bail or custody, defendants appear in court in one of the following three circumstances (Ashworth and Redmayne, 2005, p 40). One, they appear on bail in cases where they have been charged with an offence and are required to attend court under penalty. Two, they appear in custody if they have been refused bail by police; and, three, they appear in response to summons that requires they attend although in the first instance no penalty is carried for non- attendance. Dealing with committal proceedings in these courts require that the Bench decide on whether a case to answer is based on the prosecution statements. In an event that Court finds that there is a case to answer, it is committed for trial to the Crown Court; but if there is no case to answer, the case is discharged (Davies et al, 2011, p. 87). ii) Crown Court In regard to Crown Courts, they deal with more serious cases that require greater punishments especially those that require prison sentences that exceed 12 months. These courts have qualified judges to deal with cases presented before them. Crown Court is one of the Senior Courts of England and Wales constituents. In criminal cases, Crown Court is regarded as a higher court of first instance (Newburn, 2007, p. 48-9). Crown Courts focuses on the following three main activities: sentencing persons convicted in the Crown Court either on pleading guilty or after trial; sentencing defendants who have committed from jury trials and Magistrates’ Courts; and, appealing the magistrates’ decisions. Normally, judges who sit in the Crown Courts are: Recorders (Barristers in private practice who sit as part time Judges), Circuit Judges, and High Court Judges. Senior Circuit Judges and the High Court Judges are usually allocated the most serious cases such as rape and murder (Davies et al, 2011, p. 36). The remaining cases are usually handled by Circuit Judges and Recorders. Hearing of appeals from the Magistrates’ Courts in the Crown Court can be concluded by confirming the Magistrates’ Court sentence, reversing or varying certain parts of the decision which is under appeal (Savage and Bretherwick, 2011, p. 52). In an event that the appeal is decided against the accused person, the Crown Court may impose any sentence that might have been imposed by the magistrates or impose a harsher one (Sanders, Young and Burton, 2010, p. 80). Since the magistrates’ courts can only impose a prison sentence of 6 months or a fine of up to £5,000, the court can commit defendants to the Crown Court for sentencing if they are of the view that offence(s) committed require greater punishment that cannot be inflicted by the Magistrates’ Court. Ashworth and Redmayne (2005, p. 85) notes that when the Crown Court is dealing with cases that are related to indictment, say from a jury trial, appeal are usually handled in the criminal division of the Court of Appeal and thereafter the Supreme Court. Visits to Courts The visits were made to the Brent Magistrates’ Court and Southwark Crown Court. During the visits, several observations were recorded that were used to evaluate the administration of justice within both courts. Observations from each court will be discussed separately; these observations consider several aspects. Brent Magistrates’ Court In Brent Magistrates’ Court, there were 4 defendants who appeared in the Court during the time of my visit. Each defendant was facing different charges on non- serious crimes; they were accused of assault, violation of city’s regulation, traffic offence, and assault. The first and the fourth defendants seemed to have a good understanding of the proceedings. They understood quite impressively the kind of crimes they were facing. However, the second and the third defendants did not seem to have a good understanding of the proceedings; they could not comprehend the kind of charges they were facing and the procedure to follow in court. The same observation was made by the court clerks who offered to help them understand the proceedings. The guilt or non- guilt of an accused person in this court is decided by the defendant first appearing before the court then go through the proceedings that determine whether he or she is guilty or not. In this court, the defendant first identifies him/ herself to the Court. After the Court has been satisfied with the identity of the defendant, it makes consideration on the charges. In case the charge is summary offence, the Court expects the defendant to take a plea. If the defendant takes the plea of “not guilty”, the Court fixes a date when the trial begins or is done. Fixing of the date of trial takes into account the availability and the number of the witnesses (Sentencing Council, 2011). If the defendant takes a plea of guilty, the Court then decides on the sentence. If the powers of Magistrates Court are insufficient to sentence a particular case, the Court declines jurisdiction of trying the case. If this happens, Magistrates’ Court will adjourn the case and allow four to eight weeks period for prosecution to prepare the case at hand for committal to Crown Court (Davies et al, 2011, p. 63). As observed in Brent Magistrates’ Court, there are no juries in Magistrates’ Court. Visit to the Brent Magistrates’ Court and inquiries that I made provided insights on the officers available in such a court and the roles that they play. The court is presided over by district judge or a bench of lay magistrates. They are assisted by several court officers; that is, legal adviser and court assistants/ clerks. The legal adviser’s main role is to make sure that the procedures of the court are followed and directing the Bench properly on its power and the law. Assisting legal adviser in Court’s business are the court assistants or clerks who ensure that Court’s business are conducted efficiently. Their role is very significant in this Court because these courts are mostly presided over by lay magistrates who are not trained adequately in law and they therefore need additional advice on legal issues (Newburn, 2007, p. 35). It was explained to me during the visit that despite the fact that court officers play a critical role in Magistrates’ Courts proceedings, their advice should be neutral and no attempt should be made on their part to exert influence on the decisions made by the Bench. Moreover, the visit and observation gave me the impression that the magistrates, judges, prosecutors, and defence lawyers make great efforts towards administration of justice. In normal circumstances, as it was during the visit, I got the impression that their role is driven towards administration of justice and nothing more or less. This was evident through their interaction with the defendants; they interacted politely with the defendants and treated them as innocent (a key requirement in the criminal proceedings especially during the initial stages). After the trials were through, three defendants were acquitted and one was convicted after proceedings that I considered as fair and within the tenets of justice. The magistracy was made up of two males and one female, while I was informed that the District Judge in the Brent Magistrates’ Court is a male. Lay magistrates were reported to age between 36 to 44 years, while the District Judge is reported to be49 years of age. Lay magistrates were from White British, Asian British, and White Irish ethnic groups, while the District Judge was White British ethnic group. My general impression of the day’s proceedings in Brent Magistrates’ Court was good and found it interesting with strict adherence to the provisions of law and that which aims at administration of justice. However, against my expectations, I found the Court proceedings lively with several instances of light jokes emanating from the Bench, defendants, and the Barristers; all along I had thought that court proceedings were serious and light jokes did not exist or those who resulted to them were seriously reprimanded. The three defendants were acquitted for lack of substantial evidence but the fourth defendant was convicted. The fourth defendant was sentenced to six months imprisonment after being found guilty of assault. I considered this punishment proportionate and the decision to acquit the three appropriate. Davies et al (2011, p. 111) argues that the purpose of such sentences is to punish the defendant with the intention of preventing him from committing such an offence in the future. I feel that Brent Magistrates’ Court were administering justice fairly as they were guided by the circumstances surrounding the case which they considered objectively and their decision was guided by legal provisions relating to the case at hand. Southwark Crown Court My visit to Southwark Crown Court provided insights and understanding on how the Court operates and how serious crimes are handled. During the day of the visit, I observed a case involving one defendant. He was charged with murder which is indeed one of the most serious criminal cases. The defendant I saw in Southwark Crown Court looked composed even though he seemed not to understand the Court’s proceedings. However, this was not a big challenge to him because he was represented by a Barrister. The decision for guilt or non- guilt in this Court is decided through trial by judge and jury. The offenders who have been found guilty after trial or pleaded guilty are sentenced since they are guilty offenders (Sentencing Council, 2011). I also noted that the Court also dealt with cases that the Magistrates’ Courts did not have jurisdiction to try. Additionally, I made observation that the Court made decisions of guilt or non- guilt of accused persons who had appealed sentences passed by Magistrates. Unlike the observation that I made in Brent Magistrates’ Court, Crown Court have jury thus jury trials. Brooks (2004, p. 201) explains that jury seeks to ensure that there is a reasonable social representation during trial which is critical in criminal justice proceedings. Jury plays an important role in ensuring that unjust or unpopular laws cannot be enforced (Findlay, 2001, p. 69). Apart from Prosecutors, Circuit Judges, Recorders, and High Court Judges who sit in the Crown Court, the Court has other officers such as Court assistants who help in making sure that the business of the Court are conducted efficiently. The impression of the role of the judges, prosecutors, and defence lawyers that I got in the Southwark Crown Court was that they work towards administration of justice. There is no direct interaction between the defendants and the judges and prosecutors. However, it is evident from their reactions and responses to different arguments from the defendant and the defence lawyer that they are objective and seeks to administer justice, rightfully. Judges who sat in the Southwark Crown Court were aged between 41 and 52 years. There were two males Judges (Both were White British) and one female Judge (White Irish). In general, I was impressed with the day’s proceedings in the Southwark Crown Court. Particularly, I was impressed by the structured approach that was used during the proceedings, and with the manner in which sentences were determined while at the same time creating room for judicial discretion. The accused was sentenced to life imprisonment as required by English law for persons convicted of murder. I consider this punishment proportionate because I consider the sentence imposed to the defendant reflected the crime he committed and is proportionate to the seriousness of the crime (Sentencing Council). The purpose of the sentence is first and foremost to make those related to the victim see that justice has been done. The other purpose is to keep out the offender from the public because he is a threat to the public (Davies et al, 2011, p. 113). The jury were able to determine justice especially after believing the prosecution evidence against the defendant. It should be noted that the Judges made their own decision; however, since the jury unanimously believed prosecution’s evidence, the influence of jury in determining justice in this case cannot be disputed. Throughout my observation of the court proceedings in the Southwark Crown Court, I feel that Crown Courts were administering justice fairly due to the strict but fair guidelines followed in criminal proceedings. Besides, the input of the jury plays a vital role in ensuring that these courts administer justice fairly. Comparison of the Differences In the light of the observations made in both the Brent Magistrates’ Court and Southwark Crown Court, it is evidently clear that these courts bear some differences. It is important to note that these differences are, largely, as a result of the difference in powers accorded to each of these courts (Hudson, 1999, p. 15). Regardless of the differences, their roles towards administration of justice are vital. So what are the differences between these courts? Firstly, their differences emerge from the powers accorded to each of them; as observed, Brent Magistrates’ was dealing with less serious crimes such as petty theft and traffic offences, while Southwark Crown Court was dealing with the most serious crimes such as murder. Secondly, the composition of the Bench in each of these courts were different based on qualification; whereas cases in Brent Magistrates’ Court were presided over by lay magistrates, cases in Southwark Crown Court were presided over by Senior Circuit Judges, High Court Judges, and Recorders. Due to lay magistrates’ relatively little knowledge in law, the service of legal adviser is necessary Magistrates’ Court, a situation which does not exist in Crown Court. Another difference that was noted is in relation to jury; in Brent Magistrates’ Court as is the case with Magistrates’ Court in England and Wales, there was no Jury. But as noted in Southwark Crown Court, jury is present and often plays a crucial role in determining justice (Brooks, 2004, 210). Lastly, as noted from the observations in both courts, Magistrates’ Courts usually handle high number of cases compared to Crown Courts (Ashworth and Redmayne, 2005, P. 38). During the visit to Brent Magistrates’ Court, the court was handled four cases during the whole period that the court was in session, while during the visit to Southwark Crown Court I saw only one case being handled for the whole period that the court was session. Conclusion In conclusion, the observation and analysis made proves that the courts play a very important role in administration of justice. Visit to Brent Magistrates’ Court and Southwark Crown Court showed that these courts bear some differences even though they are similar in a number of aspects especially in their goal of administering justice. The differences between them can be largely attributed to the powers accorded to them for administration of justice. Finally, it can be deduced from the observations that; regardless of the powers to different types of courts, they use various instruments to promote fair trial and foster administration of justice. Bibliography Ashworth, A and Redmayne, M 2005, The Criminal Process, 3rd Edition, Oxford University Press Brooks, T 2004, “The Right to Trial by Jury”, Journal of Applied Philosophy, 21, 2, 197-212. Davies, M. et al, 2010, Criminal Justice: An Introduction to the Criminal Justice System in England and Wales, London: Pearson-Longman. Findlay, M 2001, “Juror Comprehension and Complexity”, British Journal of Criminology, 41, 1, 56-76. Hudson, A 1999, Towards a Just Society: Law, Labour and Legal Aid, Pinter: London. Newburn, T 2007, Criminology, Willan Publishing. Sanders, Young and Burton 2010, Criminal Justice, Oxford University Press. Savage, S and Bretherwick, D 2011, Lay Justice or Professional Justice in T. Ellis and S. Savage (Eds.) Debates in Criminal Justice: Key Themes and Issues. London: Routledge. Sentencing Council, 2011, Sentencing Guidelines, Available: www. http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/sentencing-guidelines.htm (Accessed: February 2, 2012) Read More