Letter: Putting the case for magistrates' courts

Mrs J. D. H. Rose
Monday 26 April 1993 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.

Sir: Your leading article of 22 April ('No confidence verdict on JPs') suggests that many of the defendants electing trial by jury do so because of a lack of confidence in the magistrates' courts and in the belief that they will receive a fairer trial and/or a lighter sentence in the Crown Court.

These concerns - which are to a great extent encouraged by legal advisers - must, as you say, be put at rest and, indeed, the evidence already exists to refute them. Home Office research published in 1992 (Mode of trial decisions and sentencing, Helderman and Moxon) shows that most defendants electing Crown Court end up pleading guilty by the time of the trial.

In many cases, the decision achieves nothing but delay, additional time spent on remand (possibly in custody) and a more severe sentence than might have been awarded in the magistrates' court - yet most of the defendant's decisions were in line with legal advice.

Defendants and their legal advisers need have no doubts about the fairness of trial in the magistrates' courts - which deal with more than 95 per cent of all criminal cases each year at about one-tenth of the cost per case in the Crown Court.

Magistrates are better trained now than ever. They are trained to be impartial and to make a judicial decision on the basis of all the submissions put before them - not, as you unfairly suggest, solely on the basis of the prosecutor's proposals.

Yours sincerely,

JOYCE ROSE

Chairman of Council

The Magistrates' Association

London, W1

26 April

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