Courts

In the United States, the court systems are separated into county, state, and federal courts.  In England and Wales, there is only one justice system for the country.

All criminal cases begin the court process in Magistrates’ court. According to the Magistrate that we met on our trip, Magistrates are court volunteers, who must be between the ages of 18 and 70 years old, be of good character, have a lack of prejudice, and have no criminal record for any serious offense. Similar to Justices of the Peace in the U.S., Magistrates are lay persons, not lawyers, but they do have a legal advisor. Magistrates sit in judgement of their peers, and hear cases involving summary offenses. Defendants may ask for a trial, but the trial would not involve a jury. Any trials in Magistrates' Court are what we would call a “bench trial” in the United States. Magistrates approve search warrant applications, as well as immigration and mental health warrants.  

Cases involving more serious charges are heard in Crown Courts, where a defendant is entitled to a jury trial. In England these are known as “indictable” offenses (i.e. robbery, rape, murder, assault causing grievous bodily injury). Some offenses are known as "either way" offenses, (for example burglary, or assault causing bodily harm) and can be heard in the Magistrates Court or the Crown Court. If a defendant is denied bail, his trial must be held within 6 months. Less than 10% of criminal cases go to the Crown Court for trial and/or sentencing. In London, the Central Criminal Court is the Old Bailey.

Trials in England and in the United States are based on the principle from the Magna Carta, “No free man shall be taken or imprisoned, or dispossessed or outlawed or exiled or in any way ruined, nor will we go or send against him except by the lawful judgment of his peers or by the law of the land.”

Trials in Crown Courts are similar to the United States justice system, with one unique feature; jury verdicts are not required to be unanimous. With a jury of 12 persons, a majority verdict is allowed with 10 or 11 jurors agreeing to a verdict. According to our tour guide, trial defense is generally undertaken by a criminal solicitor, who then employs a barrister to present the case in court. Representation is publically funded for indigent defendants eligible for legal aid. Like in the United States, the prosecution must prove the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. However, if he raises a defense, he then bears a burden of proving his defense to the jury. During trial, the defendant must sit in the “dock,” not next to his counsel, and if he would like to communicate with his lawyer, he must pass a note. Barristers wear a wig and black gown in Court.

At the Old Bailey, we witnessed a hearing during the trial of David Harris, charged with three counts of Solicitation of Murder of his wife Hazel Allinson. He had apparently testified a few days before, and had said he had become infatuated with a young woman he met at a brothel. He was lavishing expensive gifts on his mistress, and they had a five year affair. Prosecutors alleged the defendant had tried to pay various men to kill his wife in order to inherit their home and money. The last one he tried to hire was an undercover police officer. He admitted to the jury that he told a man he would pay him £150,000 to kill his wife, but he was doing so in order to research a book he planned to write. On May 18, 2017, the jury convicted David Harris (a retired producer of the cop drama The Bill). He will be sentenced at a later date and faces a lengthy prison term.

2012 government figures for offense types commonly sentenced in the Crown Court:

                            Assault/Public Order 23%

                            Theft/Dishonesty/Fraud 17%

                            Drug Offenses 14%

                            Burglary 12%

                            Robbery 7%

                            Sex Offenses 7%

                            Driving Offenses 4%

                            Other 16%

(Statistics taken from “Inside the Crown Court” by Jacobson, Hunter & Kirby)

Following a guilty plea or guilty jury verdict, the Judge will impose a sentence. In the case of a negotiated plea bargain, the defendant may plead guilty with the understanding that a lesser sentence will be recommended, but the Judge may disapprove. Sentencing is based in part on the calculation of sentencing guidelines, in both Crown Courts and Magistrates’ Courts. For each crime, there are a range of sentences that are available, but the decisions are guided by the concept of proportionality. The idea is the severity of the sentence should match the seriousness of the offense relative to the harm caused and the offender’s culpability. The current sentencing guidelines from 2007, require the court to take into account the defendant’s guilty plea. To save costs and court resources, defendants are given a benefit for pleading guilty at an early stage as opposed to those that put the Crown to the burden of having a trial. Those that plead guilty at an early stage are given a 33% reduction, those that are a late pleaders are given a 25% reduction, and those that plead guilty on the eve or the beginning of trial are given a 10% reduction. Like in the United States, sentencing factors are outlined in a probation officer’s report. (Source: The Origins and Nature of Sentencing Guidelines in England and Wales).

Tower of London, where prisoners of old were taken to be imprisoned before execution

 The Royal Courts of Justice houses the Criminal Court of Appeal. On our first day in London we heard the oral reading of an Appeals case while visiting the Royal Courts of Justice. In this case, a 30-year-old military veteran was driving a lorry when he failed to break, after being on his phone just moments before, and caused a fatal accident driving 43 miles per hour. He was found guilty of Dangerous Driving involving death. The appeals court reviewed the aggravating factors and mitigating factors that were taken into account when the first Judge imposed the sentence, but then substituted a higher sentence, saying that the first judge had given undue weight to the mitigating factors overlooking the aggravating factors (one death, multiple injuries, using his cell phone while driving etc.).