Advertisement

Senior Court of Appeal judge: Remove right to jury trial for petty criminals

Lady Justice Hallett  - PA
Lady Justice Hallett - PA

Defendants should not be allowed to choose a jury trial in some petty crime cases, a senior judge has said. 

In a speech at Pembroke College, Oxford, Lady Justice Hallett, who sits on the Court of Appeal, said that a full jury trial could cost £20,000 for defendants accused of offences such as stealing sweets from a supermarket.

She said the Government should "remove the right to elect trial by jury in cases that simply do not warrant it". 

The most serious offences are indictable, meaning they have to be tried in a Crown Court. 

Summary offences are almost always tried in a magistrates' court, while "either way" offences can be tried in either depending on seriousness. 

The defendant can choose to go to crown court for either way offences only, which include theft. 

Last year 1,637 defendants chose to be tried by a jury in a crown court, 1.7 per cent of the total of 98,668 which were tried in crown courts. 

If each case cost around £20,000, the total cost would be £32.7m.

In 2009 a Birmingham man was tried and acquitted of stealing a banana worth 25p from the Bullring shopping centre after he chose to have a full crown court trial.

Pembroke College, Oxford - Credit: Geoff Pugh
Pembroke College, Oxford Credit: Geoff Pugh

The vast majority of cases - 61,011 - were passed to the Crown Court by magistrates who thought they were too serious to be tried in the lower court. 

Crown courts have the power to impose tougher sentences but have a lower conviction rate. 

The time taken for a case to get to Crown Court also allows a defendant to gather evidence and prepare for the case. 

Earlier in the speech Lady Hallett said: "The jury is seen by some as an unfair and time-consuming process, a ‘luxury’ placing an expensive burden on the state (albeit it operates in only 1 per cent or 2 per cent of criminal cases).

"If you are a prolific shoplifter accused of stealing sweets from Tesco should you have the right to demand jury trial at a cost of approximately £20,000?"

The senior judge, who is vice president of the Court of Appeal's criminal division, cited the high-profile case of Vicky Pryce, who was convicted of taking her husband's speeding points. 

The original jury was discharged after asking ten questions which the judge, Mr Justice Sweeney, said showed a  "fundamental deficit in understanding".

Lady Hallett concluded that on balance the jury system was worth retaining despite its flaws. 

Donal Lawler, secretary of the Criminal Bar Association and a barrister at 187 Fleet Street Chambers, said theft was included in the "either way" category because of its potential impact on someone's reputation. 

"It's the act of doing something dishonest rather than its actual value. The reputational impact of that is enormous," he said. 

He added that he had seen numerous cases where a defendant had chosen to go to the Crown Court on a relatively minor charge and had been cleared. 

"We've all seen quite a few of those - you initially think 'that looks absurd', but when you drill down you see the human effect a conviction would have. 

"I dealt with someone who had a bit of a chequered past but had made big changes, had places sorted out at college. 

"They were accused of something relatively minor, but chose to go to Crown Court. 

"The time taken over a summary trial can be a lot quicker - and things came out over that longer process which utterly exonerated them," he said.

Register Log in commenting policy