This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/03/questions-remain-court-response-riots
The article has changed 7 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Disaster averted but questions remain over courts' response to riots | Disaster averted but questions remain over courts' response to riots |
| (9 months later) | |
| Three thousand people have now appeared in court in connection with last August's riots. Partly as a result of arrests made during the disturbances, and largely as a consequence of the widespread availability of CCTV and other identification evidence, magistrates' and crown courts have faced a sudden and sizeable influx of extra work. | Three thousand people have now appeared in court in connection with last August's riots. Partly as a result of arrests made during the disturbances, and largely as a consequence of the widespread availability of CCTV and other identification evidence, magistrates' and crown courts have faced a sudden and sizeable influx of extra work. |
| Just as police forces found themselves facing an emergency, very quickly the courts were in all-night and weekend hearings, with prosecutors and defence lawyers working well beyond anything they had previously experienced, as lines of security vans delivered dozens of arrestees to court. Faced with a civil crisis, the legal system worked round the clock to do its part in the restoration of order. | Just as police forces found themselves facing an emergency, very quickly the courts were in all-night and weekend hearings, with prosecutors and defence lawyers working well beyond anything they had previously experienced, as lines of security vans delivered dozens of arrestees to court. Faced with a civil crisis, the legal system worked round the clock to do its part in the restoration of order. |
| The general consensus, based on testimony given to the Reading the Riots project by defence and prosecution lawyers, is that the system coped well. There were times that the criminal justice system was close to breaking point, but the efforts of all involved ensured any potential disaster was averted. | The general consensus, based on testimony given to the Reading the Riots project by defence and prosecution lawyers, is that the system coped well. There were times that the criminal justice system was close to breaking point, but the efforts of all involved ensured any potential disaster was averted. |
| However, this picture, while important, tells only part of the story. The emergency practices in the early days after the disturbances, and the operation of the legal system in the months since, leave at least three important questions hanging. | However, this picture, while important, tells only part of the story. The emergency practices in the early days after the disturbances, and the operation of the legal system in the months since, leave at least three important questions hanging. |
| First, was the remand system used appropriately? Defence and prosecution lawyers told us fear of further rioting meant that bail was generally refused. Given the circumstances, many will understand that argument. But for how long were we in a state of emergency, and was it reasonable to continue refusing bail when there was little reason to think further disorder was likely? | First, was the remand system used appropriately? Defence and prosecution lawyers told us fear of further rioting meant that bail was generally refused. Given the circumstances, many will understand that argument. But for how long were we in a state of emergency, and was it reasonable to continue refusing bail when there was little reason to think further disorder was likely? |
| Second, was due process sufficiently observed? Concerns remain that rather than treating each case on merit, the pressure on the criminal justice system produced something closer to what one respondent called "conveyor-belt justice". (It is thought the mass transfer of cases in the magistrates' courts to district judges may have contributed to this.) This is all the more worrying given recently reported plans to introduce a fast-track system based on experiences of the riots, for people accused of offences linked to the Olympics. | Second, was due process sufficiently observed? Concerns remain that rather than treating each case on merit, the pressure on the criminal justice system produced something closer to what one respondent called "conveyor-belt justice". (It is thought the mass transfer of cases in the magistrates' courts to district judges may have contributed to this.) This is all the more worrying given recently reported plans to introduce a fast-track system based on experiences of the riots, for people accused of offences linked to the Olympics. |
| Third, were the sentences imposed on rioters justified? We now know that custodial sentences were much more likely to be imposed, and that sentence lengths were substantially longer than normal. This is particularly clear in relation to juveniles – which is understandable, perhaps, in that they were most prominent in the riots, but worrying in that they would ordinarily, and rightly, be treated as particularly vulnerable. | Third, were the sentences imposed on rioters justified? We now know that custodial sentences were much more likely to be imposed, and that sentence lengths were substantially longer than normal. This is particularly clear in relation to juveniles – which is understandable, perhaps, in that they were most prominent in the riots, but worrying in that they would ordinarily, and rightly, be treated as particularly vulnerable. |
| The only possible defence of the much greater of use of custody is the fact there was an emergency that required extraordinary responses. But this still demands clarity as to when that emergency ended, and when standard sentencing practice could again have been expected to prevail – something signally lacking thus far. And anyway, in relation to sentence lengths, this defence hardly applies. By the time even a shortish sentence had been served, the disorder would have long finished. | The only possible defence of the much greater of use of custody is the fact there was an emergency that required extraordinary responses. But this still demands clarity as to when that emergency ended, and when standard sentencing practice could again have been expected to prevail – something signally lacking thus far. And anyway, in relation to sentence lengths, this defence hardly applies. By the time even a shortish sentence had been served, the disorder would have long finished. |
| This leaves deterrence as the only explanation. But, as is recognised by the director of public prosecutions, and supported by a considerable body of research, it is swiftness and certainty of punishment, not its extent, that is important. | This leaves deterrence as the only explanation. But, as is recognised by the director of public prosecutions, and supported by a considerable body of research, it is swiftness and certainty of punishment, not its extent, that is important. |
| For all these reasons and more, understanding the nature of the judicial response to the riots is of great importance. Unfortunately, and in contrast to the involvement in our study of rioters, victims, police officers, defence lawyers and the Crown Prosecution Service, thus far the judiciary have rebuffed all requests. Paradoxically, it is easier at the moment to contact an unconvicted looter than a judge. | For all these reasons and more, understanding the nature of the judicial response to the riots is of great importance. Unfortunately, and in contrast to the involvement in our study of rioters, victims, police officers, defence lawyers and the Crown Prosecution Service, thus far the judiciary have rebuffed all requests. Paradoxically, it is easier at the moment to contact an unconvicted looter than a judge. |
| Tim Newburn is professor of social policy and criminology at the LSE | Tim Newburn is professor of social policy and criminology at the LSE |
| guardian.co.uk today is our daily snapshot of the top news stories, sent to your inbox at 8am |