Jury-free tests were recommended to save courts from ‘collapse’

According to the recommendations made by a former senior judge, thousands of cases should be normally heard in front of a jury, decided by judges alone.

Sir Brian Leaveson was asked by Lord Chancellor to come up with a series of proposals to reduce the backlog of cases in criminal courts.

There are about 77,000 cases waiting for the trial in the Crown Court in England and Wales – which means that some defendants and the victims are waiting for years for justice.

After reviewing the status of criminal courts, Sir Bryan suggested the “fundamental” reforms that “reduce the risk of collapse of the total system.” But some barrister argues that the churches are essential for fair justice – and it is wrong to scrap them.

To decide what he says to a broken system, Sir Bryan has suggested to be a judge-only trial for some cases such as fraud and bribery.

Another recommendation involves warning more than court proposals.

He wants a new division of the Crown Court with two magistrates and a judge to handle less serious crimes, and to increase the number of conviction for convicted arguments on the first occasion presented.

All this is about shortening the process in the hope of cutting large backlogs.

“Our criminal justice system stands at a significant turn,” Sir Bryan who was requested to look into the matter in December Last year.

He said, “It is well believed that justice has been denied justice, but records and rising court backlog means that the victims, witnesses and defendants are waiting, sometimes years, to prosecute cases – unable to move forward with their lives,” he said.

Sir Bryan stated that the proposed changes are “designed to convert our courts into a system that provides for appropriate and fair decisions.”

He said: “It also takes a proportional approach to testing procedures while maintaining the fundamental right to a fair test.

“These are not small twics, but there are fundamental changes that will try to make the system fit for the 21st century.”

Proposals would mean more cases will be heard in the courts of magistrates, in which jury tests are reserved for the most severe cases.

In any way, crime with maximum custody of two years or less can face crime, such as drugs, bike theft, and viorism possession, 12 -month imprisonment or less punishment.

Defendant in cases of crimes, including an emergency worker attack, will no longer be able to select jury tests to stare and keep a pornographic picture of a child.

All lawyers do not agree with the suggested changes, however.

And in response, Mary Prior KC, president of the Criminal Bar Association said: “Any fundamental change requires the criminal barrister who prosecutes and defended in the Crown Court, to believe that this is the best way to believe that.

“As this is such a radical change in the criminal justice system, we will hear what our members say. There is a lot to digest.”

Advocate advocate Manisha Nights with MK Law said: “Our jury system is central and is important for our justice system.

“There is a variety of zeries while the judiciary still lacks a lot. The attempt to be tried by someone’s colleagues should not be removed in any way, size or form.”

But the Magistrate Association welcomed the review and said that it will speed up justice for thousands of people.

“Magistrates are ready to support these and other initiatives with the aim of reducing the pressure on the Crown Court,” said the National Chairing Mark Beatty of the Magistrate Association.

“We urge the government to implement Leaveson’s recommendations as soon as possible. Every day they are not in the place, there is a day when the victims, witnesses and defendants will have to wait for justice.”

Met Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowle said: “As Sir Bryan has correctly identified, the criminal justice in this country runs the risk of” collapse of total system “until we take the fundamentalist steps required to reverse the years of decline.

“It may not be correct that more than 100 tests listed in London are for 2029. It is unbearable for the victims and all parties, which rely on a properly working court system, which often shut down from painful experiences, which are constantly delayed.”

He said: “I welcome this report and look forward to working with the government partners to distribute the bold reforms that are now a need, not an option.”

Among the recommendations:

• Recurrence of some offenses
• Creating a new division of Crown Court with two magistrates and a judge to handle “less serious crimes”, which will include some theft, theft and fraud crimes
• More and more uses from court proposals – which will allow the police to deal quickly from the lower level, often the first time derogatory – which involves the use of caution and conditional warnings
• Removal of the right to choose the test in cases where the maximum punishment is two years imprisonment, which is “summary” with the revival of some crimes (meaning that they will be heard only in a magistrate court)
• The threshold for criminal damage is being disposed of as a summary only crime is increased from £ 5,000 to £ 10,000.
• The maximum decrease in maximum punishment for guilty arguments on the first occasion increased to 40%, encouraging quick case resolution
• The judge-alon trial introduced either from the defendant from election or for the most complex cases

The review recommended immediate implementation of major reforms but admitted that it would take time to introduce many changes, and “it should be carefully managed to ensure that the public should never be put at risk”.

The government says that it will now consider all the recommendations of Sir Bryan, and will fully respond to the law in the autumn.

Lord Chancellor and Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said in a statement, “I have already removed the courts for funding for record levels, funding the days of 4,000 more courts than my predecessors.

“But Swifter justice requires bold reform, and this is what I asked to propose Sir Brian Leaveson.”

He said: “As part of our plan for change, whatever I will do that it will be to bring the backlog down and to give Swifter justice to the victims.”

A second review focusing on court efficiency will be published later this year.