The Justice of the Peace [magistrate`s] Blog:

The Sentencing Council and its predecessor have been mentioned here more often than occasionally. Considering it is the umbrella under which we sentence offenders that is hardly surprising. Its genesis was the perceived need to bring a consistency and logic to what is an art and not a science. In the last year the Council has become much more prescriptive. Like many such organisations the old proverb, “Give the devil a finger and he`ll take a hand”, could not be more accurate...eg the latest guidelines on sentencing for drug related offences extend to twenty nine pages. Even in dealing with offences under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (s 29) which is an either way offence of racially/religiously assault there are nine separate steps which must be considered by the sentencer{s}. This is all very laudable. The justice system must not be seen as a post code lottery; the comment frequently used to describe the varying outcomes possible for similar conditions treated under the NHS in different areas. But what of all the hundreds of thousands of offences and offenders whose activities do not reach the courts? Every police force in the country has its own operational procedures for the issue of Fixed Penalty Notices :apart from motoring offences these can involve everything from littering the street to childrens` non attendance at school. banning orders, control orders etc and cautions of one form or another.

The latest form of out of court disposal is the Neighbourhood Resolution Panel. This form of “justice” is appearing currently in many districts and not to the satisfaction of all. Its results are controversial. Advertisements such as this have been widely published recently.

There seems to be a certain incongruity in the whole process of apprehending wrong doers, charging some of them and the consequential judicial process for others. In common parlance it is a joined up system;not.

I began this blog in November 2009 to express in some small way my observations and criticisms of and frustration at the legal system from the point of view of the J.P. on the Clapham omnibus. Sometimes the view has been of Clapham pre-gentrification. Now after 157,000 visitors this is blog # 1,000 and the content below is of more predictable chaos and reduction in the defendant`s right to even the semblance of an equality of arms. There was no doubt that some lawyers milked the Legal Aid system as it was constituted but with the excuse of budget cuts there has to be so much more interference by legal advisors and bench chairmen to ensure that justice is seen to be done for the unrepresented defendant resulting in unavoidable delays. The cack handed decimation of courts and their employees has been conducted with the grace of a drunken butcher in an abattoir. Providing a total justice system upon which the citizen can rely for complete and unadulterated fairness is one of the only two requirements that must and can only be offered by the state. The other is defence of the realm. In this regard the state is failing us all.

And so to the meat of this blog....that most interesting of legal news sources Crimeline [copied below] has led to this case below being brought to a wide audience. The comments on the legal aid system and its systemic delays apply to many of our sittings.

High Court Condemns Magistrates’ Court Legal Aid System

In a strongly worded judgment the High Ct today condemned the current system of means testing in the magistrates’ court. Whilst the case was concerned with extradition proceedings (and is essential reading for lawyers in this area) it has broader application across the board and will require all courts to re-think their current attitude of always seeking to progress cases in the absence of a grant of legal aid.

“It is clear from what we have already said that delays occasioned by means testing which are not occasioned by the fault of the requested person or his legal advisers, cannot be held against the requested person. Indeed, as we have said, it would be unjust in cases where the initial advice of a duty solicitor (under a properly funded scheme) is insufficient, to proceed either (a) to obtain the consent of the requested person to extradition or (b) with the extradition hearing itself, unless and until the means testing procedure is completed and adequate time to advise and obtain evidence has been afforded.The effect of the Ministry of Justice's current system is in practice to stop the clock as regards the position of the requested person in such cases. Until means testing is complete, it is unreasonable to expect the legal adviser to advise. That may put the court as the executing authority and as the branch of the state responsible for the performance of the obligations under the Framework Decision in breach of those obligations, but that breach is not the fault of the judicial branch of the state, but of the Executive Branch. It is wrong, in principle, to visit that fault on the requested person. We appreciate that until the Ministry of Justice reforms its system for legal aid, this may cause significant delays and increase the work of the Westminster Magistrates' Court. However, the proper and fair administration of justice leaves the judiciary with no alternative until the present legal aid system is reformed.”

This comment from a District Judge was particularly depressing:

“District Judge Evans drew attention to the risk of creating "an industry for lawyers to make money out of routine cases by allowing inappropriate adjournments so as to accommodate defence requests to seek evidence". Counsel in the appeal and the LSC all denied that there was any such industry. A court must, however, be astute to such a risk. It can guard against it by a suitably rigorous examination of requests for adjournments as we have set out.”

"We therefore cannot accept the evidence of Mr Gascoigne that there is no systemic failing in the design or structure of the system for means testing. For example,
i) It is difficult to see how the target of 6 working days for the consideration of the legal aid application (see paragraph 4.ii) above) is compatible with the 60-day period in Article 17 or fair in the case of a person remanded in custody.
ii) The policy of presuming that a person remanded under an EAW will continue to receive his pay (as referred to in paragraph 4.iii) above) is irrational in extradition cases where the requested person is in custody. It has the consequence that the only option left to the requested person, or his advisors, is to trigger the "Hardship Review" procedure. This requires a fresh application and evidence. The requested person is, in effect, back at square one.
iii) As time is of the essence, it is inexplicable that Forms CDS14 and CDS15 (a) cannot be filled in and submitted on line but are merely electronically downloadable, (b) require physical signatures rather than electronic signatures and (c) are unnecessarily complex and non user-friendly.
iv) The system appears to take no account of the obligations imposed on the judiciary under Article 17 of the Framework Decision and the overriding requirement that the UK's system is compatible with its international obligations undertaken under Articles 11.2 and 17."

As a magistrate I can truly say that I have never felt that any sentence in which I have been involved was not deserved or was disproportionate to the offender and offence committed. There have been occasions when I have been reinforced in my belief that the public interest has been well served. Such a time was when a twenty year old male convicted for the third time of an offence under the Public Order Act for which previously he had been fined was made subject to an immediate tagged curfew between 7.00pm and 7.00am for eight weeks. His reaction and abusive and unruly behaviour in the dock made it clear that the sentence would be fitting for the crime and the criminal. It is not always possible to achieve such an outcome.

Fuel prices have been making news this week with the coalition`s latest U turn and its flimsy arguments being seen for all their worth. Nevertheless there are individuals prepared to buy fuel, especially diesel, off the back of a lorry. At Cambridge Magistrates` Court this week fuel thieves got more than they bargained for. In addition to paying costs and being subjected to an unpaid work requirement their lorry used for the transportation of the stolen fuel was ordered to be destroyed. That punishment surely fitted the crime and no mistake.

There`s no doubt that when I see I`m listed for “non CPS” court I enjoy my pre sitting coffee that little bit more. Perhaps it`s only after sitting for a few years that the mental stimulation of adjudicating on all the diverse matters at such courts becomes almost toxic.

The Sentencing Council`s effort to reduce variation in sentencing laudable as it first appears is becoming almost a tick box exercise. Yet this very approach, based upon sentencing guidelines in the U.S. state of Minnesota, was apparently rejected prior to the SGC`s establishment in 2004. Be that as it may the sheer variety of offences and defendants makes for interesting work. Planning breaches, school attendance, counterfeit goods, ticket touting, selling alcohol or cigarettes to children, disqualification from acting as a company director, fly tipping and waste disposal or other environmental offences provide an opportunity for straight forward common sense consideration and sentencing, With a bench of three it is not uncommon for a colleague to have particular insight into the nuts and bolts of an offence in any of these areas where it is demonstrable that the mini jury that constitutes a bench of three Justices of the Peace is a unique British institution which appears to be being undermined by those who would have professional judges sitting alone on all summary matters.

This country has a long and noble history of campaigners and campaigns. Not being a social historian I list the following great Britons in no particular order who changed the way that our society conducted itself in the 19th & early 20th centuries..... William Wilberforce, Elizabeth Fry, Florence Nightingale, William Booth, Emily Pankhurst. Nowadays single agenda organisations are more prolific than individuals and for some of their members become all consuming causes. These single minded individuals can sometimes allow their cause to excuse their breaking the law. Protesters at Greenham Common endured hardship for twenty years in their protests against the stationing of cruise missiles on that site. History will tell if their protests were misplaced. Extremist animal rights` proponents ostensibly with impeccable social and socialist credentials led to the formation of the Animal Liberation Front; an avowed terrorist organisation which used unashamed tactics of fascistic terror in an attempt to cow its opponents into submission. One common factor applicable to all protesters if the authorities suspect their behaviour has transgressed legal limits is their innocence before the law until or unless they have been proved guilty.

Two new dimensions are currently throwing into turmoil basic rights which at one time were a beacon from this island shining out worldwide……..the need for government particularly of the local kind to obtain the maximum number of pennies its citizens can be forced to pay and the saturation of this country with CCTV. The Campaign to Protect Rural England is a charity with an income of just under £4 million. Its purpose is to campaign to promote the improvement and protection of the English countryside; a laudable objective. But as with groups with similar laudable intentions its methods or intentions can easily stray beyond the boundaries of what it means to be British living in Britain.

Currently it is pushing forward proposals such that the registered keeper of a motor vehicle will be held responsible for any litter dropped from said vehicle and be subject therefore to the financial penalties resulting. Of course there will not be vast numbers of mobile litter patrol cars observing these miscreants; the observers will be the 1,850,000 or four million CCTV cameras [depending on what statistics are preferred] operating mainly in urban environments. I didn`t notice many in rural Derbyshire last time I was there. Without much additional expenditure local councils are being lobbied to allow such un English activity as guilty until proved innocent in order to increase their income. No doubt the argument will be that by doing so improved services will be available. Tell that to businesses near me where parking charges have trebled in the last couple of years and reduced customer flow accordingly or to those in the City of Westminster who rely on evening visitors for the viability of their businesses when the City Council mooted parking enforcement on a 24 hour basis.

Those single minded purists who pursue their version of righteousness to the exclusion of all else and all others deserve careful consideration of their proposals and the possible ramifications of their often misguided idealism.

Since the onset of this current age of austerity we have been bombarded with statistics on deficits, historical and future, balance sheets real and virtual, etc etc etc…….enough to make political economists of all persuasions past turn in their graves and present pundits accountable for their views sometimes to their professional embarrassment. All such financial chicanery, one would have thought, rests on actual knowledge of how much this or previous governments actually spent and/or have budgeted to spend. One would appear to have been optimistic at least according to Jonathan Djanogly (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (HM Courts Service and Legal Aid), Justice; Huntingdon, Conservative).

In answer to a parliamentary question on June 13th he admitted that prior to the formation of the quango known as Her Majesty`s Courts and Tribunals Service the costs of running the country`s magistrates` courts were unknown. “The Ministry of Justice has no records relating to the costs of operating magistrates courts prior to the creation of Courts Service on 1 April 2005” Of course that does not preclude the disappearing numbers being in some basement in Whitehall in a dust covered folder marked “Not my fault” with an indecipherable signature in green ink. If anybody remembers Laurel and Hardy you`ll remember the catchphrase, “That`s another fine mess you`ve got us in”.

I appreciate as a comedian Justice of the Peace people will expect me to make light of this situation but I`m not going to in this statement as this is obviously a serious matter. I met with a judicial advisor and he said to me, “Do you want to do extra sittings and receive appropriate travelling expenses? New rota arrangements are such that courts are sitting with far too many two person benches.” I said “Yes”. I now realise that I`ve made a terrible error of judgement. Although I was acting in good faith I now realise that the true implication of Kenneth Clarke`s meeting on 01/03/2012 at the National Bench Chairmen`s Forum when he conceded that the debate about expenses has been ongoing for a while and he understood the complaints regarding some of the proposals, particularly concerning magistrates in rural areas. There was no room for any misunderstanding at Mr Clarke`s allegation that he had made about Bench Chairmen failing to manage the excessive expenses of some magistrates even when he confirmed that the comment had been taken out of context. Although he accepted that magistrates are required to travel to courts nevertheless the issue arose because a hard core pool of people sitting all the time as their entitlement and using their position as a magistrate as an equivalent to full time employment and claiming expenses is unsatisfactory.

I`m no longer going to respond to emergency pleas for extra and short notice sittings and will in future conduct my allocation of sittings much more responsibly. Apologies to everyone.

I wonder if those in the civil service who negotiate contracts for the provision of services and contracts from nuclear reactors to submarines to aircraft carriers to new hospitals to………..have any concept of the value of money as we tax payers understand it. Headlines today tell us that providers of toddlers` milk rations at nursery schools are paying £1 for milk that any supermarket sells for 50p. In business bulk buying means lower unit costs. With contracts like that is it any wonder that sensible people despair of the profligacy endemic amongst those in the civil service who direct the spending of our hard earned cash.

SERCO is one of the largest service provider conglomerates in the country. One such contract it “won” is to provide court security and to ensure the safe and timely transportation of prisoners to and from courts. I blogged on 12th October 2011 that this company was not fit for purpose. The spiders that monitor this blog noted around that time frequent viewings from the company`s headquarters. It would appear that I am not alone in justifiable criticism. In East London serious complaints have been made of the company`s poor performance. Her Majesty`s Courts and Tribunals Service is a quango typical of all that is to be criticised of the way public services in this country are run. A local newspaper report is available here. Note the typical “mind your own business” arrogant response from HMCTS.

We might not have serious corruption within the public and civil services but that does not mean that the whole system is not functioning at the lowest common denominator of what can be termed efficiency.

It has been variously estimated that 70% - 90% of violent/anti social and/or acquisitive offending is by addicted individuals whether due to alcohol or class A drugs or a combination of both. Every court every day somewhere in the land a bench of magistrates sighs at its own impotence in being unable to refer the apology of an individual to where he should be referred ie by a compulsory order to be treated in a specialised institution until two psychiatrists consider his release would not be a risk for society. ASBOs, Drink Banning Orders, Fixed Penalty Notices etc are as much good as an aspirin for terminal cancer.

More than once I have blogged on this gaping hole in our supposed caring compassionate health service. So if you`re obese, infertile, use abortion as a means of contraception, have ears which stick out too much or have arrived here illegally with a host of diseases treatment is free at source. But to suggest that drug addiction and alcoholism be considered as health problems is akin to shouting “Jesus saves” in a mosque or synagogue. As far as I am aware the costs of treatment for addicts in purpose built establishments would be insignificant in comparison with the escalating costs to victims emotionally and to tax payers in pounds and pence for continuing on the road we now travel.

It has become increasingly common for governments to publish for public perusal “consultation documents” on proposed policies prior to these policies being implemented. The cynic would say that unless the public reaction were overwhelmingly against a proposal it would eventually see the light of day as its authors intended anyway.

A couple of days ago the latest such document appeared; “ A consultation on changes to the treatment of penalties for careless driving and other motoring offences.” Within it there is a lot to digest but like many similar documents it`s a mixed bag: eg there are some statements made without qualification which are much less straightforward than at first appearance para.2.11 being an example where an unmentioned explanation for a reduction in FPNs could be the reduction in enforcement owing to fewer police cars on traffic patrol. Similarly it is statistically a no brainer that fewer court prosecutions does not necessarily mean fewer offenders. There is no mention of whether or not there would be an increase in the categories of people empowered to issue FPNs. I seem to remember that such powers were considered being given to various uniformed street patrolling personnel. Some would say that so called remedial training offered instead of penalty points is unfair insofar as it penalises poorer drivers whose financial situation is more precarious than many others for whom no price is too high to avoid penalty points.

For those interested the document is available here.

With almost half a year since the amalgamations of our three benches sitting with total strangers is still a regular feature for all my colleagues; I am as strange to them as they are to me……more so many would say. Having had a scientific background when I was appointed it was not at all difficult for me to appreciate the logic of and to put into practice “structural decision making”. I fear that some of my new colleagues with more years experience than I find this concept still a hurdle to overcome.

Not long ago we had to sentence an offender who was clearly in the category “so serious that custody is the only option”. This chap was where he was for multiple non violent offending. One colleague found it difficult to agree in principle to this disposal because his offending was indeed non violent nor involved any basic dishonesty. Eventually with our third member`s assistance she was brought round to the logical conclusion we had each reached.

This attitude to non violent offending is not confined to J.P.s. So called white collar crime attracts more than its fair share of apologists for non custodial sentencing in this country as opposed to America where financial fraud is generally dealt with more severely than here. It seems the same thinking is behind the complaints that all the resources being devoted to phone hacking etc are disproportionate and should be concentrated on anti social and violent criminality. There are certain fundamentals required for our still democratic way of life to be able to continue and those perhaps for some seem more esoteric than they would consider necessary.

A few days ago I sat in a breach court situated in the building which previously housed the business of a smaller bench which was amalgamated with ours in January. Since only a relatively small proportion of our sittings takes place in this small building each visit is akin to working in a new location. The courtroom where we sat had a secure dock but owing to the lack of an usher the door was left open. I was informed that was the normal procedure on health and safety considerations. Presumably the health and safety of court users other than the defendant`s was not a consideration. The public gallery had only a very low wooden barrier to separate it from the well of the court. Fortunately although we had to send two breach offenders to custody their friends and relatives responded only with some mild verbal abuse; the situation could easily have turned more combustible. When this lack of security was raised during the post court review our very experienced L/A, a slightly built lady no more than five foot three inches tall, told us that she and her colleagues had complained repeatedly through their trade union of the possible danger of violence within that particular courtroom but precisely nothing had been done.

There has been a steady decline in the protection offered to court users over the last twenty years. Police officers no longer are employed to secure courts or buildings; private security companies have been given that job and they are only available to the bench when called and sometimes not after 5.00pm. Ushers and legal advisors are being exposed to risks that would not be tolerated in many other countries. Serious disorder within courtrooms is generally not a major problem at present and headlines are always made when judges are attacked. Disorder within magistrates` courts appears to be a low but acceptable risk.

Every dog has his day, dog day afternoon, it`s a dog`s life, dirty dog, dog`s bollocks, the hair of the dog, sick as a dog, teach an old dog new tricks, shaggy dog story and all the other doggy tails {tales} make more sense than apparently the antics in Teesside when council prosecutors insisted on taking the bench et als to Redcar beach where man`s best friend was accused of doing doggie doos on the beach. Seems the council have made a dog`s dinner of the whole business.

“I`ll stop smoking after I`ve finished this cigarette”; “when did you stop beating your wife”? “why should I return excess change....it`s their fault”, “so I have bought a cheap telly from a guy in a pub”, “one more fix and I`ll stop”...those comments and many similar have been made and heard a thousand times from the payment of cleaners in cash to M.P,s and their Lordships insisting all would be well after realising their mistakes and making appropriate repayments. In other words we`re all fine fellows with good intentions and want to see the law enforced where the bad guys get their just deserts....bollocks!

Recently the Institute of Advanced Motorists, a group of self selected arrogant drivers, has revealed....note the term “revealed”:- “made known by inspiration”, “displayed”, “shown that which was previously hidden”, “exposed”...that with approximately 211,000 motorists prosecuted for mobile phone use in 2010 alone, an organisation called GEM Motoring Assist`s survey results show that 91% of UK drivers think the penalties should be increased to act as more of a deterrent. This is another so called survey the results of which we are led to believe apply to the UK`s drivers in general. David Williams, CEO of GEM Motoring Assist is quoted as saying, “It’s interesting to see that drivers themselves believe that the penalties are not severe enough.”

With so much self serving nonsense such as this is it any wonder that when well analysed statistical information agreed by peer review on any matter from medical research to GM foods to global warming is made public it is often greeted by a large yawn and a “so what”.

One day the wolf ate the boy before he could warn the village.

I have opined here previously my disquiet over the powers to grant a restraining order against a defendant who has been acquitted of assault or similar against a wife or partner. Sometimes however situations arise for one to reconsider a previously strongly held position.

Mr A. was an extremely wealthy Muslim gentleman with homes in three continents and the one in question which brought him before us some months ago was, he was proud to tell us, the most expensive house within twenty miles of the court. He lived there when in Britain with his current wife and three former wives and assorted offspring. As he was being identified one of my colleagues, a tailor by trade, remarked that his suit would have cost about £1,500. On hearing that, the jeweller on my right observed that his Rolex would have left little change from £10,000. So the stage was set. Remarkably he was unrepresented although as the matter proceeded his legal knowledge, confidence and eloquence rendered that apparent lack somewhat superfluous. The charge was that he had assaulted the second wife by pushing her down the last couple of steps of a staircase when she had complained about his treatment of her child. It became apparent that having a current wife living under the same roof as the three previous holders of that title was a recipe for a certain domestic disharmony. He was found not guilty. CPS then applied for a restraining order on the grounds that he had been found guilty of assault against the same complainant a year previously. We granted that order.

The latest criminal justice statistics have just been published and no doubt will be the subject of media interest over the next few days. As with many such bundles of information there will be conclusions backing up the propaganda of many interested parties from the Secretary of State to the Police Federation. Sentencers will continue do their job without fear or favour.

One of the more interesting comments I recollect hearing whilst watching some of the Jubilee coverage whether from Sky, BBC or CNN I know not but in essence was that increasingly more people were sympathetic to the Royals because trust in politicians is a diminishing factor. Whether there is a flaw in the “cause and effect” argument is not my concern but certainly the utterances of our political leaders where words are used to obfuscate fact is also becoming the norm for many public and corporate bodies an example being the cover up of the Rochdale grooming scandal.

The arguments that the cuts in public funding can be produced without “hurting the front line” wherever or whatever that front line might be are being shown, two years on, to be on increasingly shaky ground but it seems we cannot be told this by government. All of us in the magistrates` courts know that courts are being cut owing to the lack of staff, usually legal advisors, whose numbers are being reduced by around 10% or so I have been informed. As a direct result courts are overlisted in a vain attempt to cram more trials that can possibly go ahead into a single sitting the result causing defendants and their representatives to lose money and for the former the continuing worry of waiting ever longer for their trial.

At Bristol Crown Court such delays have now been reported to a wider public. There is little doubt that events at Bristol are typical of justice delayed elsewhere. As an example of the responses expected from government spokesmen the following hardly reaches bronze medal standard:-

A Ministry of Justice statement said the number of sitting days in Bristol this year has been reduced by only 10. "Senior judiciary will monitor workload and performance levels to ensure standards are being maintained," the statement continued.

This is a totally fatuous reply and means precisely nothing which of course was the spokesman`s intent.

In a similar fashion Lancashire Police have stated that only just over half of Fixed Penalty Notices issued by them have been paid. The official comment in response is:-

The Government takes the issue of fine enforcement very seriously and Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service is working to ensure that clamping down on fine dodgers is a continued priority nationwide.

Currently about £2 billion in unpaid fines is lodged in a government balance sheet somewhere but reading a parliamentary answer from May 23rd the picture looks a lot more rosy because of the term “payment rate”.

Perhaps I am less cynical than I thought and am still depressed that those who govern us cannot trust us with the truth.

s.172 Duty to give information as to identity of driver etc in certain circumstances.

There surely must be changes in the format of this requirement? Heaven knows how many such notices are disputed in magistrates` courts owing to alleged non receipt and subsequent convictions appealed at Crown Court. We are familiar with the arguments against having the notices sent out as “to be signed for” post. The likelihood of massive changes in our postal system in the near future do not augur well for any reduction in the numbers who claim they did not receive the notice or the statutory reminder. If e-mail and/or mobile phone number were required information for V5 registration document and DVLA were prohibited from supplying such information to third parties perhaps we would have fewer cases before us. Of course there are many caveats to proposals which further invade our privacy but I don`t believe the current system can continue for much longer.

All those familiar with the criminal courts will have been aware of the problems when Capita plc took over the supply of court interpreters. My personal recollections are probably typical but I don`t intend to rehearse here the occasions on which the “supply” was exemplified by its unavailability.

The Ministry of Justice has published its statistics on language services for the first period of the year. Its 31 pages are available here for those who have the stamina.

ADDENDUM 11th June 2012

Reports of this problem of interpreters and ALS {Capita plc} are beginning to reach the media. Perhaps when the tales of inefficiency are lead stories in the Daily Mail some notice will be taken by those in Whitehall who count the beans.

I am no Royalist but there is no doubt that the hysteria surrounding this weekend indicated that this particular monarch has embedded herself within the cellular structure of many people. Subsequent to her grandson`s nuptials last year and the forthcoming extravaganza in East London in a couple of months there is a level of British nationalism in the air unheard, unseen and unfelt for a generation. As a third and seventh generation descendant of immigrants to this country who were forced to leave their native lands as a result of the extreme nationalism enveloping their countries of birth a lingering suspicion of that universal force has been with me since childhood. Of course there can be no nation without nationalism and that is the paradox. What has particularly given me hope for the future from all the Jubilee celebrations is that our national flag; the Union Jack, is no longer the preserve, at least in England & Wales if not in Northern Ireland and around Ibrox Park on a Saturday afternoon, of the British National Party, English Defence League, National Front or any other group of fascists masquerading as nationalists. It has been reclaimed by the citizens of the U.K.

Justices of the Peace are careful from their first days` sitting to avoid any inadvertent bias regarding race, religion, sexual preference etc. etc. whether in the retiring room or on the bench. Only for a very small and diminishing minority is that observance a difficult task. But when it comes to apparel there are no clearly defined rules on what is appropriate and what is not excluding of course for J.P.s themselves who have “advice” from those on high. Cannock magistrates this week considered that a defendant wearing shorts was not dressed appropriately. He returned in women`s clothing. Occasionally discretion from the bench in the face of apparent disrespect achieves more than outright heavy handedness.

It can safely be said that the days of the court reporter are well past their peak. Of course the nationals give full coverage to those cases of special interest……..a daughter accusing parents of killing her sibling, parents accused of murdering small children, former employees at 10 Downing Street being charged with perjury etc etc but the nuts and bolts of local newspapers reporting from local magistrates` courts are now more often than not just a list of offenders, their offences and the outcomes. It is not uncommon to read local journalists` opinions of a day`s events at such a court using their column inches to justify their often inaccurate and unresearched criticism. Therefore it was refreshing to read in The Guardian an observer`s account of the day`s proceedings at Southend Magistrates` Court; an account which attempted to tell not just the results but the content of those proceedings.

There is no doubt in my mind that in a few years there will be live broadcasting from magistrates` courts. The relatively low cost of local digital television programming and the scent of additional income for HMCTS will turn current thinking on its head.