LETTER: Judging a balance of right and wrong

P. J. Crossley
Tuesday 12 September 1995 18:02 EDT
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

From Mrs P. J. Crossley, JP

Sir: John C. Welch ("Court is no place for amateurs", 6 September) uses assertion and casuistry in place of argument. There are several respects in which the stipendiary magistracy is not superior to the lay bench, and appointments to the lay bench are driven not by the desire to obtain a balance - although it would be manifestly unfair if a balance were not sought - but by the selection of people of integrity and understanding.

Lay magistrates, unlike stipes, come from many different backgrounds, understand local issues and can interpret the law flexibly to suit local conditions.

Four recent pieces of legislation took away the autonomy of magistrates in administering sentences and payments. The original Criminal Justice Act had the effect of fixing fines so that magistrates could not use their discretion. The Child Support Agency took over the administration of maintenance payments from the magistrates courts. The poll tax also removed a great deal of magistrates' discretion, and the Dangerous Dogs Act has had the same effect. The fate of these government attempts to bypass the moderating effect of common sense should make politicians think twice before handing local justice over completely to the professionals.

Yours faithfully,

P. J. Crossley

York

8 September

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in