The civil case which was tried at Brentford magistrate court was possession, in which the courts’ aim was to manage the claim for possession of residential property for non payment of rent. Other less serious crimes were also witnessed such as vehicle theft were also witnessed where there was one District Judge instead of a panel of magistrates who sentenced the defendant. District judges are required to have at least seven years experience as a barrister or solicitor and two years experience as a Deputy District Judge and deal with more complex and sensitive cases. District judges also have the same sentencing and decision making as ‘lay’ magistrates. At the beginning of each case the clerk calling the case asked everyone to stand as the magistrates or District judge entered the court, the clerk then asked the defendant to identify themselves and to state the charge against them and whether they understand the charge against them. It was found with a number of cases that if the defendant pleaded guilty the case was dealt with at once, however, if the defendant pleaded not guilty the case was adjourned to another date for a Pre Trial Review so that both sides had enough time to arrange which witnesses should appear and how long the case is likely to last, after which a trial date would be fixed. The magistrates and District judge listened to the proceedings and made decisions on further questions such as where the trial should be heard and whether to grant adjournments, however, we observed that the majority of cases were dealt with in one session. For the cases of possession observed neither of the cases were adjourned. Court clerks are professional legal advisors to non-stipendiary magistrates and are qualified lawyers but do not take part in the decision making of a case. During the cases the clerks answered the magistrates questions and explained the points of law and court procedure and advised them on possible penalties for the offenders. Any advise given to the magistrates was given and repeated in open court so that both the prosecution and defence knew the legal advise which determined the magistrates decisions. A senior magistrate spoke on behalf of all three magistrates, however, all three magistrates had equal power. I also found that although the District judge had seven years of experience he still relied on the clerk to state the law. Outside the court room we observed the clerks completing paperwork ordered by the magistrates such as warrants and emergency protection orders. They also administered legal aid and adoption procedures and monitor licensed premises and bookmakers. The prosecutor is a member of the CPS and in each case presented the case against the defendant when an ordinary criminal offence had occurred. Other organisations are also liable to prosecute such as the Local council for council tax defaulters and the Department of Transport for Excise Licenses. The defence advocate acted on behalf of the defendant. Only a lawyer (a barrister or solicitor) can take on this role. It was found during the court room observations that not all defendants were represented by a defence advocate as the defendant can conduct the case in person, however, this was only the case for less serious crimes such as vehicle theft. The defendant was placed in the dock for vehicle theft, however, defendants of less serious crimes such as possession were seated outside the dock. It was observed that when a decision was to be made the defendant had the opportunity to pass comment. This was usually done through the lawyer if the defendant had one. The defendants also had the opportunity to request or object adjournment and if they had pleaded guilty then they were also given the opportunity to explain their point of view before the magistrates reached a decision. In cases of possession the defendants tended to be both male and female, in their early twenties and from white working class families. The way the defendants presented themselves had a major impact on the final decisions by the magistrates and district judges. The defendants who to dress formally and were well spoken were given more lenient sentences, compared to those who did not dressed casually.
At Slough Magistrates court there was a possession case where the female defendant which I will refer to as ‘X’ failed to arrive at court. The case was delayed, however, it was decided that it would still proceed. This case had previously been adjourned and X was represented by her lawyer. There was no clerk present at this case because a District Judge was sentencing the defendant instead of magistrates and therefore had knowledge of the law. The District Judge stated that he would be less lenient and sided with the claimant when sentencing X, solely because X failed to arrive at court and ordered the defendant to pay the rent due plus an extra five hundred pound fine. Any fines that are set by the court are based on the seriousness and the financial means of the defendant. The landlord was also given permission to re-enter the premises immediately. In another case of possession, the defendant a white working class male attended the court and was dressed formally. The District Judge was more lenient towards the sentencing and ordered the defendant to pay the six thousand pound rent due and pay the claimant’s court costs of two hundred and seventy six pounds, even though the claimant was asking for more rent. The landlord was also given permission to re-enter the premises but at a given date. At Brentford Magistrates Court there were a number of vehicle related criminal cases such as theft and vandalism. The magistrates in the majority of cases gave sentences to the defendants which included paying the claimants court fees and paying for any damage they had caused to the vehicles.
Upon leaving the Magistrate court we were fortunate to be able to talk to one of the District Judges and we asked him about the sentencing process in the magistrate court. The information he provided us with stated that unlike Crown courts where jury decide whether or not the defendant is guilty, the magistrates in the Magistrate courts decide whether or not the defendant is guilty or not guilty. In specific ‘either way’ cases the defendant has the choice as to whether or not the trial should be heard at a crown court in front of a judge and jury. If the defendant at the Magistrates court pleads guilty then the magistrates will either pass the sentence themselves or send the case to a Crown court if they believe that their sentencing powers are insufficient due to hearing the details of the offence.
Members of the public and the press were allowed to attend adult court hearings. The youth court deals with cases which involve children between the ages of ten and seventeen and includes the same type of cases which are involved in adult cases, however, the youth panel can impose wider sentences. The aim of the sentence is to prevent the youth from re-offending and drifting into a life of crime. Magistrates who deal in youth courts have to be specially trained. The public and press are not allowed to witness any cases that take place in youth courts because they are a private matter. The family court is another specialist court which involves cases where children may be at risk and need to be cared for and protected. Other private law cases are also dealt with in family courts such as arrangement for contact between children and parents where the parents are no longer living together. The magistrates receive special training to deal with family court cases and as they are a private matter the public and press are not allowed to witness the case.
The Crown court was visited early in the morning. We entered the court building through a side entrance which was for public use. As we entered we were searched by two Black male and female uniformed security guards. We were told that we could not bring our bags, mobile phones or any electrical devices into the court room. Only purses and wallets were allowed to be taken inside. This was a problem for us as we therefore could not take any notes inside the court room unlike in the Magistrates court. The court did not have a cloakroom where we could leave our possessions and therefore we had the choice of leaving them in our vehicles or leaving them in a nearby coffee shop in which case we had to pay two pounds per item. We were surprised as we did not have to do this in the Magistrate court. We reported to ushers to let them know that we had arrived and waited in the waiting area until we were called into the court room.
As we entered the court room we sat in the public gallery above the rest of the court. There were four rows in the public gallery, however, the first row was sealed off to avoid the public distracting the people participating in the case. We were not allowed to stand up or talk during the case. We entered the court room during the middle of the case and we were only allowed in the court room for ten minutes due to the seriousness of the case, whereas in the Magistrates court we were allowed to witness the whole session. We were able to see the jury which consisted of six people, two White females and four males, one of which was of Asian ethnicity and the rest were White, they all appeared to be between thirty and fifty years old . They were dressed formally in suits, ties and shirts and were taking notes constantly. There was one judge instead of a District judge or panel of magistrates. The judge was a black woman and wore a dark black cloak and a white wig, however, I expected the judge to be a white, middle-aged upper-class male due to the medias perception of Crown court judges. In Lord Taylor’s 1993 description of judges he referred to them as males who direct the jury on the law who must accept these directions but may disregard any opinions the judges have. There has been criticism of the racial composition f the judiciary in 1997 by the then Lord Chancellor, Lord Irvine who stated that he wished to encourage ethnic minorities to apply for jobs in the judiciary.
As were seated above the court room and therefore we were unable to see where the defendant’s lawyer was seated. We also could not see where the relatives or friends of the victim were seated. The victim’s lawyer was a white male aged over fifty and represented the victim as the victim was a young Muslim who had been killed.
The lawyer was stating that the killing was racially motivated by a white male in his early twenties who I shall refer to as ‘Y’ stood in the witness box guarded by security. His social background was unknown to us, and although he did not speak he kept his head lowered and hands clasped together in which case his body language portrayed guilt as the prosecution lawyer stated what had happened prior to the attack. At this point the judge bowed to the court and left the court room for a couple of minutes. When she returned she bowed again. I was surprised to see that nobody stood up when she left or re-entered the court room. I was also surprised because the case continued without her presence. The judge also did not state the law to the jury during the ten minutes that we were in the court room which was a disappointment as we were unable to witness her interaction with the jury.
In conclusion we had learned a lot about how a magistrates court and Crown functions. The key observation made answered our questions on what the role of the Judges and other actors such as the prosecution, lawyers, clerks, defendants and ushers and jury and how they interact with one another, and how the defendants behaviour can have a significant affect on the seriousness of sentence they are given. If we were to extend our research we would visit more Crown Courts in order to gather richer data and compare sentences.
References:
Ashworth, A. (1995) Sentencing and Criminal Justice(2nd edition). London, Butterworths
Bryman, A. (2001) Social Research Methods. Oxford: OUP.
Croall,H.,Davies,M., & Tyrer,J.(2005) Criminal Justice (3rd Edition), Longman.
Dunbar, I. & Langdon, A.(1998) Tough Justice:Sentencing and Penal Policies in the 1990s. London, Blckstone Press LTD.