Lady Hale warns against juryless trials
Scotland’s juryless trials pilot has been criticised by retired judges south of the border.
Lady Hale, formerly president of the Supreme Court, and Wendy Joseph, a former Old Bailey judge, said the scheme may undermine faith in the legal system. Their remarks came during a discussion at the Hay Festival about the proposed Victims, Witnesses and Justice Reform Bill.
In a standard year, Police Scotland receives around 2,500 rape accusations, which lead to roughly 150 convictions. Responding to this, Judge Joseph, 71, said that judge-only trials were not the right answer. She said: “If it is true … that juries do not understand problems of women giving evidence in rape cases, it isn’t, in my judgment, a reason to stop juries trying rape cases – it’s a reason to educate juries.”
Lady Hale, 78, said: “By and large I am a believer in the jury because all the criminal judges I know – and I know a great many of them – are all believers in the jury and they can’t all be wrong.”
She suggested that the issues surrounding rape and other sexual violence cases could be traced back to decisions taken much earlier. These include factors such as police actions, the quality of police investigation, and the proper maintenance of evidence.
“I think all of those things contribute to what’s undoubtedly painful but I think it’s much less the jury than things that are done earlier,” she said.
She also emphasised the significance of juries in criminal trials as they represent the community affected by the crime. While judges in civil cases can rectify wrongs, criminal courts exist to facilitate a community response to criminal acts.
“In a criminal court, we can’t put right crime,” she explained. “Even at the Old Bailey we can’t ‘undead’ a dead person. The people who are at risk by wrongdoing are the community and it is the community in the form of 12 people drawn at random from the electoral register that make that crucial decision.
“The importance of a fair trial in criminal cases – it’s not only to convict the guilty, it is to reassure the innocent that they won’t be wrongly convicted. That’s a major reason for all of us being law abiding: the reassurance of a fair trial if you are accused of a crime.”