Justice and Home Affairs Committee
Tuesday 8th September 2026
Skip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
(began 3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Watch LiveSkip to latest contribution
This debate has concluded
10:33
Lord Foster of Bath
-
-
Lord Foster of Bath
To order. The meeting is now being recorded and public proceedings are beginning. Five. Four. Welcome, everybody. Good morning to this meeting of the Justice and Home Affairs Select Committee. In our second evidence session in our inquiry into support for jurors. And we're absolutely delighted to have a Cali call, Casey, in front of us. Just for the record, if you could just give us your name officially and your role.
10:34
10:34
10:34
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
And I'm obviously a member of the GMB and one of the founder members. So I want to make it absolutely clear, because I don't think the judiciary would have allowed me to come here that I'm here on behalf of GMB, which means I'm here. Yes, on behalf of our judges division. But the staff, the ushers, the court managers, also the people who support jurors who work with them every day, and the support staff, like prison people who deliver the prisoners and who also look after them.
10:35
Lord Foster of Bath
-
-
Lord Foster of Bath
Thank you very much. It's very helpful to know, as you know, we're predominantly looking into the support that is or is not provided for jurors, including support that they might get in relation to any traumas from having gone through particularly difficult trials, sexual abuse, murder, whatever it might be. Obviously, in doing that, it's quite useful for us to know what support similar support might be being offered to other people within the judicial system.
So I wonder if you could just begin by telling us a little bit about, for example, what support is offered to people like you, the post that you hold in the event that you have problems as a result of particular trials you've dealt with.
So I wonder if you could just begin by telling us a little bit about, for example, what support is offered to people like you, the post that you hold in the event that you have problems as a result of particular trials you've dealt with.
10:36
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So I think Professor Cheryl Thomas from University College London has submitted a report to you or will be. I think she has, and she's covered the main lines of support. So we have Pam Assist, which is a company engaged by MoJ, which provides up to six sessions of counselling. We have eMDR, iPad, both counselling and eMDR, eMDR as rapid eye movement desensitization for trauma. Mine wasn't a case related, but it was work related.
So then after that one has to get. There may be an extension, but mainly pay for one's own because I'm still seeing the same psychotherapist and it's seven years this month. Also, there are welfare judges. There's a helpline that people ring.
So then after that one has to get. There may be an extension, but mainly pay for one's own because I'm still seeing the same psychotherapist and it's seven years this month. Also, there are welfare judges. There's a helpline that people ring.
10:36
10:36
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
There are two judges, one for the tribunals and one for the courts , who can be contacted by any judge at any time and offered support. I don't I have contacted one once, but I didn't get hear back. And so there's all of these things are policies and they're there, but they work to varying degrees depending on who is implementing them and how they're being implemented. So some people have had very positive experiences, some people less so, but there certainly is counselling available and it is good.
And eMDR is a very well known method of treating trauma. And it is effective. I would say it reduced mine by about 80%, which I thought was hugely successful.
And eMDR is a very well known method of treating trauma. And it is effective. I would say it reduced mine by about 80%, which I thought was hugely successful.
10:37
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Wanting the same. It's the same for Hmcts. It's the same company. It's all through the MoJ. So they have the same access to those services as we do. They have in our own courts. We have a mental health ally. In my court it's in usher. But so from there she can signpost any member of staff to obtain whatever help is available. There's quite a low take up rate with staff.
There's a low take up rate with judges. But it's not that it's not there. It is there. Again, I think their experiences of the staff is they've used it sometimes to good effect, and sometimes they haven't felt that it helped or they were being particularly helpful. But
There's a low take up rate with judges. But it's not that it's not there. It is there. Again, I think their experiences of the staff is they've used it sometimes to good effect, and sometimes they haven't felt that it helped or they were being particularly helpful. But
10:38
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yes. It's promoted. Well, the Lady Chief Justice promotes it. We have a judges have a Thursday newsletter which sets out everything which always has all the links to HR. We've got an HR department, we have a click through link which has all the different services offered by HR. I'm also a nominated judge for grievance and whistleblowing, so that has the 12 of us there so that if anyone wants to raise a grievance, whether it's against staff or judges or raise any issue, whistleblower particularly, they can contact any of us as they wish, and we can then direct them to support as well.
There's also occupational health provided for the judiciary and the staff. So I have an occupational health doctor who reports on me. So a number of other judges who help, support and make sure that reasonable adjustments are, well, they can't make sure they're given because they're discretionary, but they make sure they're recommended.
There's also occupational health provided for the judiciary and the staff. So I have an occupational health doctor who reports on me. So a number of other judges who help, support and make sure that reasonable adjustments are, well, they can't make sure they're given because they're discretionary, but they make sure they're recommended.
10:39
10:39
10:39
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
So they start with the preparation for the trial itself. In a trial where there would be very alarming imagery, the prosecution have already taken the steps to to turn them into images which are not real. So not cartoons, but we don't see the real body. We don't see the real body parts. And they will make sure that that is is available to the jury in on paper and also on the screen to the extent we can.
But also, it's a decision that has to be taken by each individual judge. And there's very great disagreement about it. Should we warn a jury panel? That's usually the big question. I started doing it at the beginning of 2018 when I had a trial, which, try as we could, we could not find a way to present terrible material in any other way than them seeing it. And on that case, I actually told the jury panel a bit myself, and then I handed over to prosecution counsel who described some of the images in detail.
And then what I do and other judges do is to identify ourselves subjectively, cases where we think this could be a problem case. And before the jury are sworn, I tell them a little bit about it, not in great detail. And I say, and basically I say something like, jury service is a civic duty. You're here to do jury service. Juries up and down the country are trying very serious cases, far more serious than this.
But there are those amongst us who, whether from our own experience or someone close to us, will be affected in a way that will make it impossible for them to reach a fair verdict in the trial, or to be able to concentrate on this type of evidence. That is not that is not a ticket out of jury service. Even if you're excused from this trial, you'll still have to do jury service. But I then move from where I'm sitting to the edge of the bench.
There's then a step and I say, if your name is called, just come and speak to me privately and let me know if you feel you can't do this trial. But please remember this once we start, there are 12 jurors. You stay on this train with me until the train gets to its last destination. So please don't tell me in three days time. I don't like this.
But also, it's a decision that has to be taken by each individual judge. And there's very great disagreement about it. Should we warn a jury panel? That's usually the big question. I started doing it at the beginning of 2018 when I had a trial, which, try as we could, we could not find a way to present terrible material in any other way than them seeing it. And on that case, I actually told the jury panel a bit myself, and then I handed over to prosecution counsel who described some of the images in detail.
And then what I do and other judges do is to identify ourselves subjectively, cases where we think this could be a problem case. And before the jury are sworn, I tell them a little bit about it, not in great detail. And I say, and basically I say something like, jury service is a civic duty. You're here to do jury service. Juries up and down the country are trying very serious cases, far more serious than this.
But there are those amongst us who, whether from our own experience or someone close to us, will be affected in a way that will make it impossible for them to reach a fair verdict in the trial, or to be able to concentrate on this type of evidence. That is not that is not a ticket out of jury service. Even if you're excused from this trial, you'll still have to do jury service. But I then move from where I'm sitting to the edge of the bench.
There's then a step and I say, if your name is called, just come and speak to me privately and let me know if you feel you can't do this trial. But please remember this once we start, there are 12 jurors. You stay on this train with me until the train gets to its last destination. So please don't tell me in three days time. I don't like this.
10:41
10:41
10:41
10:42
10:42
10:42
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
They use the fact that jurors are drawn at random. We don't ask them questions as they do in America about their backgrounds and their health issues and their interests. We just take a jury as we find them, which has been traditionally a British approach. And I and I don't disagree with it. I didn't disagree with it. I grew up with it. But then having been in trials because sadly, my practice was I mean, I had everything from war crimes and genocide to serious sex and serial murder, serial rape.
I realized that in some trials, a juror would react, and then that juror would have to be discharged. We then end up with 11 or 10, and that's something we try and avoid. So it doesn't I'm not saying it always works or it's the perfect answer or that it's obligatory, but I feel that I'm protecting the trial process and protecting the jurors that would be badly affected by doing it in that way.
I realized that in some trials, a juror would react, and then that juror would have to be discharged. We then end up with 11 or 10, and that's something we try and avoid. So it doesn't I'm not saying it always works or it's the perfect answer or that it's obligatory, but I feel that I'm protecting the trial process and protecting the jurors that would be badly affected by doing it in that way.
10:43
10:43
10:43
10:43
10:43
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Okay. Yeah. Well I, well I will in a moment ask you if I can read something because my, my jury manager who has a jury bailiff who's been doing the job for 15 years and says, I can mention her name has written something and just and I think that's more useful to you. But in mitigation, I think more, more information before they do jury service, that there may be cases that could affect them to let the jury manager know when they get to court.
Some do and some, for example, in Woodgreen, we have religious minorities who don't want women in their in their families to try sex cases. And then they write in resident judge decides. And the judge usually says, that's fine, you can do some other case and puts a note to say, don't. Don't allocate this juror to a panel with a sex case. Then I think, I think we should use more of a I.
I think we should use repurpose the NHS self-help AI tools, repurpose them for juries, make them secure, have a juror page which they can enter using the juror number because every juror has a number. And start with AI telling them a little bit about jury service. Then after the case, that would be the beginning place for them to start accessing support. Then there might be a helpline and there might be counselling as well for those that need it.
But I think we could do a lot more than we're doing, than it wouldn't necessarily cost that much to do it.
Some do and some, for example, in Woodgreen, we have religious minorities who don't want women in their in their families to try sex cases. And then they write in resident judge decides. And the judge usually says, that's fine, you can do some other case and puts a note to say, don't. Don't allocate this juror to a panel with a sex case. Then I think, I think we should use more of a I.
I think we should use repurpose the NHS self-help AI tools, repurpose them for juries, make them secure, have a juror page which they can enter using the juror number because every juror has a number. And start with AI telling them a little bit about jury service. Then after the case, that would be the beginning place for them to start accessing support. Then there might be a helpline and there might be counselling as well for those that need it.
But I think we could do a lot more than we're doing, than it wouldn't necessarily cost that much to do it.
10:44
10:45
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
That's what the argument would be of for those who. But it doesn't really work like that because, you know, on the whole, in in if I've given the warning ten times, say in ten trials, only 1 in 10, one person in ten will come and say to me, I don't think I should do this trial. Something happened to me in my childhood. I don't think I should do it.
10:45
10:45
10:45
10:45
10:45
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
ask that question? I don't know. But yes, there are trials where we go down to ten. I personally have never had a trial that had to be aborted, nor have I appeared in a trial that had to be aborted. But it can happen. It's not just in the cases that we might think immediately. I had one that was a robbery, but an aggravated burglary, and there was lots of injuries. We didn't ask the jurors if they'd been burgled or robbed so or to tell us so we, you know, we lose we might lose one juror, but on the whole, it isn't it isn't that bad.
But I just think we ought to give warnings if because there are people who will know that they can't do certain types of cases. I
But I just think we ought to give warnings if because there are people who will know that they can't do certain types of cases. I
10:46
10:46
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
-
-
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
Thank you. Chair. Just a quick supplementary. It sounds to me like, you know, from your experience, you've developed your own kind of good practice as a judge at the start of trials, both to protect the the trial process, but also to help the jurors to some extent. To what extent is this a topic that's discussed amongst judges?
10:46
10:46
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Yes it is. So I'm a judicial college teacher and I have been since 2016. I teach on the Access to justice course. And I'm just a tutor judge. I'm not a course director, but part of our course is exactly that. Dealing with jurors, dealing with emotional jurors, how much they're paid, how much money they're losing, who are self-employed, being sensitive to their needs, being aware of their needs. And we have also talks from High Court judges.
Mrs. Justice Tipples talks to us about a high profile case she tried and how she dealt with juror issues. And so yes, it's very central to the judicial college, which is the best part of the judiciary. And really, I wish you could hear from the course directors because they really are brilliant people. And I've spent now ten years doing teaching on different courses. Everyone really tries to make us user friendly and make us understand the lives of those who are part of our process.
Mrs. Justice Tipples talks to us about a high profile case she tried and how she dealt with juror issues. And so yes, it's very central to the judicial college, which is the best part of the judiciary. And really, I wish you could hear from the course directors because they really are brilliant people. And I've spent now ten years doing teaching on different courses. Everyone really tries to make us user friendly and make us understand the lives of those who are part of our process.
10:47
10:48
10:48
10:48
10:48
10:48
10:48
10:48
10:48
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
At the moment, if I may, it will take me two minutes. If I could read you what Thelma has written, I think you'll understand it better than I can explain it. Please do so. This is Thelma Poku, who has allowed me to give her name. We give every juror a welcome pack which. Which is on an which has an emergency contact form on it. They note health needs and appointments, but it's also there for them to tell us anything else.
If they share something personal or sensitive, we note it confidentially, mark it clearly on their file, and it goes to the judge before they're ever sworn in, which which it does during the trial, when distress comes unexpectedly then and it happens, a juror gets through selection, they take the oath and then they hear the evidence and it hits them hard. They did not expect it. They thought it would be fine. I tell them if at any point, once the trial has started, you feel overwhelmed, upset or distressed, please tell an usher or come and find me straight away and I will advise you to write a note to be given to the judge.
Do not suffer in silence. Do not feel you have to push through it. Sometimes the judge will discharge that one juror. Sometimes they will discharge a whole panel and start afresh. And I always say to anyone affected, this is not your fault. You didn't do anything wrong. You could not have known how it would affect you. When the trial ends, aftercare does not stop at the court door. This is the part that's often overlooked.
The impact does not always end when the verdict is given and they walk out of the building. We give every juror information and contact details for Samaritans free, confidential and available 24 hours a day, every single day of the year. I tell them what you've heard and seen, and even what's discussed in the jury room can stay with you long after you go home. You might feel fine for weeks and then something might trigger it. If anything affects you at any time, please reach out.
You don't have to carry it alone. We're not trained counsellors, but Samaritans are there to listen without judgement for as long as you need. Over the years, jurors have come back and told me that calling Samaritans helped them greatly. That support works, but it should not not be the only support we offer, which it is at the moment. The hidden costs, caring for those who care and what. She then goes on to say, which I think is important for your committee to know.
There is another side to this story and that is us, the jury officers, the ushers, the court staff. We are the ones sitting at that front desk day after day , listening. Jurors come to us with everything bereavements, relationship breakdowns, debt, mental health crises, suicidal thoughts, family trauma. They pour their lives out to us because they trust us and because they have nowhere else to turn. We listen. We care.
We carry it all. But who looks after us? For years, the only support offered to staff has been reward and recognition certificates, thank you notes, words of appreciation. But appreciation does not take away the cumulative weight of listening to pain day in, day out. It does not replace proper wellbeing support, professional supervision or counselling for staff who are absorbing other people's trauma every single working day and our duty of care.
Jurors perform one of the most important duties in our democracy. They step forward, they give their time and they shoulder the burden of hearing the hardest truths so that justice can be done. We owe them three things honesty about what they may face, openness to listen to their concerns before they begin proper aftercare. That there is there long after they leave the court building, and we owe the staff who support them, who are the first and last point of contact for every juror.
The same care we asked jurors to accept after care should not be an afterthought. It should be part of the process. From the moment they walk in to long after they walk out. So that's a jury manager who's been doing that job for at least 15 years. To my knowledge.
If they share something personal or sensitive, we note it confidentially, mark it clearly on their file, and it goes to the judge before they're ever sworn in, which which it does during the trial, when distress comes unexpectedly then and it happens, a juror gets through selection, they take the oath and then they hear the evidence and it hits them hard. They did not expect it. They thought it would be fine. I tell them if at any point, once the trial has started, you feel overwhelmed, upset or distressed, please tell an usher or come and find me straight away and I will advise you to write a note to be given to the judge.
Do not suffer in silence. Do not feel you have to push through it. Sometimes the judge will discharge that one juror. Sometimes they will discharge a whole panel and start afresh. And I always say to anyone affected, this is not your fault. You didn't do anything wrong. You could not have known how it would affect you. When the trial ends, aftercare does not stop at the court door. This is the part that's often overlooked.
The impact does not always end when the verdict is given and they walk out of the building. We give every juror information and contact details for Samaritans free, confidential and available 24 hours a day, every single day of the year. I tell them what you've heard and seen, and even what's discussed in the jury room can stay with you long after you go home. You might feel fine for weeks and then something might trigger it. If anything affects you at any time, please reach out.
You don't have to carry it alone. We're not trained counsellors, but Samaritans are there to listen without judgement for as long as you need. Over the years, jurors have come back and told me that calling Samaritans helped them greatly. That support works, but it should not not be the only support we offer, which it is at the moment. The hidden costs, caring for those who care and what. She then goes on to say, which I think is important for your committee to know.
There is another side to this story and that is us, the jury officers, the ushers, the court staff. We are the ones sitting at that front desk day after day , listening. Jurors come to us with everything bereavements, relationship breakdowns, debt, mental health crises, suicidal thoughts, family trauma. They pour their lives out to us because they trust us and because they have nowhere else to turn. We listen. We care.
We carry it all. But who looks after us? For years, the only support offered to staff has been reward and recognition certificates, thank you notes, words of appreciation. But appreciation does not take away the cumulative weight of listening to pain day in, day out. It does not replace proper wellbeing support, professional supervision or counselling for staff who are absorbing other people's trauma every single working day and our duty of care.
Jurors perform one of the most important duties in our democracy. They step forward, they give their time and they shoulder the burden of hearing the hardest truths so that justice can be done. We owe them three things honesty about what they may face, openness to listen to their concerns before they begin proper aftercare. That there is there long after they leave the court building, and we owe the staff who support them, who are the first and last point of contact for every juror.
The same care we asked jurors to accept after care should not be an afterthought. It should be part of the process. From the moment they walk in to long after they walk out. So that's a jury manager who's been doing that job for at least 15 years. To my knowledge.
10:51
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, I think what I've heard from other courts, because I've sat now for a long time at Woodgreen, although I'm leaving next week to go to Harrow. But it's it's variable. It does depend on the quality of the court staff. And I can't say as a judge what training, how much training they have, my own understanding and my own knowledge of having been in different courts over 43 years is that it is entirely dependent on the goodwill of staff and their experience and their emotional intelligence.
And that's something that we you can't buy, but you can do better at the training of those who may not necessarily be like Thelma.
And that's something that we you can't buy, but you can do better at the training of those who may not necessarily be like Thelma.
10:52
10:52
10:52
10:52
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think what happens is that they don't those who've sought support, some of them have had positive outcomes and they've been helped. A lot of our staff are not a lot that's wrong. Some of our staff sought support during Covid because we were one of the only two courts that remained open for the whole of Covid, and judges were, okay, we've got our own rooms. We're we're away from people a bit, but the staff really got worried and they got some real help by speaking to counsellors.
But I think what she's saying is much more training and available support that is that's on the ground. Someone who checks in on you, for example, every two weeks or maybe once a month. How are you doing? Because those I can tell you because we get we get their frustrations, they email us and they have real. Some tears are really difficult, not just emotionally, but demanding. Rude that there's so much that goes on in a court.
And I do think that the MoJ Hmcts should. These are the front facing staff and I'm here on behalf of GMB, but I. The people I care about the most in any court building are the staff they really give of themselves and they do deserve more in depth and I could say proactive. All our support is reactive. You have to go and get it. And they could just think a bit more about training and putting support in place that doesn't isn't so difficult to access and doesn't require you to burn out before you access it.
But I think what she's saying is much more training and available support that is that's on the ground. Someone who checks in on you, for example, every two weeks or maybe once a month. How are you doing? Because those I can tell you because we get we get their frustrations, they email us and they have real. Some tears are really difficult, not just emotionally, but demanding. Rude that there's so much that goes on in a court.
And I do think that the MoJ Hmcts should. These are the front facing staff and I'm here on behalf of GMB, but I. The people I care about the most in any court building are the staff they really give of themselves and they do deserve more in depth and I could say proactive. All our support is reactive. You have to go and get it. And they could just think a bit more about training and putting support in place that doesn't isn't so difficult to access and doesn't require you to burn out before you access it.
10:54
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
-
-
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
Thank you very much. You mentioned the question of distressing images, the debate about whether to warn the jury panel and you explained your own practice, which, if a former recorder dare say it to an experienced Crown Court judge, I thought was admirable. Thank you. You also said that these issues are discussed in the judicial College. Can you give us a sense of if you were a recorder or a judge, would that simply be something that you dealt with at the very beginning of your service, or would it be something that is returned to at regular intervals?
10:54
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
If so, judicial college training is compulsory. It's residential. It's it's properly monitored. This the course I've just taught on it three times this year. My part of the course is actually how to deal with deaf people in the courtroom, because I had the biggest trial where everybody, witnesses and defendants were all dead. But so we have vignettes which are recorded. We all played a part in them last year at the Old Bailey, where different things happen then our classes, because I'm a class tutor, go through and we discuss what would you do now and what should you do? And then we tell them what's in the equal treatment bench book, what what guidance there is, what cases have been decided that are relevant? And they have.
And then it's a very open, friendly, pleasant discussion. And they all I think it's great. We really improve. I was
And then it's a very open, friendly, pleasant discussion. And they all I think it's great. We really improve. I was
10:55
10:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
to all the time. I teach on the recorder course too. So if you were becoming a recorder now, you'd have one of us teaching you. We do it on the recorder course. The course directors do it, so do we and we do it. Then there are a number of courses you can choose which course. So this course isn't compulsory, but most people will do it at least once in three years.
10:55
10:55
10:56
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
We've got a lot, actually. I think it's the compendium is absolutely brilliant because I started before the compendium, but it is absolutely fantastic. It's a brilliant resource. It's updated twice a year. The equal Treatment bench book, sadly, is underused because it's actually a really good source of information. And I have been on working groups, Sentencing Council and other working groups where I've suggested to them that the Equal Treatment bench book becomes a compulsory part of sentencing framework.
So people have to look at it and then they will see how useful it is. Is it enough for juries? We've got enough juries because we have criminal practice direction eight, which is really good. We have the compendium and we have the training. And people like Professor Thomas also are brilliant lecture at all of these access to justice courses. And there are others as well who tell us about the research on juries, what works for them.
It even tells us how to put our because we give written directions now into a computer, and it can make it more understandable for people who may not have that degree of education as others. It simplifies it.
So people have to look at it and then they will see how useful it is. Is it enough for juries? We've got enough juries because we have criminal practice direction eight, which is really good. We have the compendium and we have the training. And people like Professor Thomas also are brilliant lecture at all of these access to justice courses. And there are others as well who tell us about the research on juries, what works for them.
It even tells us how to put our because we give written directions now into a computer, and it can make it more understandable for people who may not have that degree of education as others. It simplifies it.
10:57
10:57
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
-
-
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
for time. But I'd like to ask you one other question, if I may, regarding prosecuting counsel and the CPS, we've received evidence that 3D printed models, for example, of murder victims skulls are just as distressing as black and white autopsy images, and that graphic evidence is associated with lower thresholds for conviction and a tendency towards guilty verdicts. In your experience, would the CPS, or would prosecuting counsel ever seek to overegg it a bit in terms of the graphic images, and are you aware of guidance that they have or perhaps ought to have on that specific issue?
10:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
They have guidance when the CPS, I don't know, off by heart, but I used to prosecute, so I had guidance then and you're not supposed to use. So when I started at the bar, the jury got everything. They got all the pictures as they were. And over the years we've changed. I think there is guidance and we try not to over. I won't say overegg the pudding, but there are. I did a case at the beginning of the year where it was my decision as to whether to pixelate the images in a particular way to to safeguard the victim who couldn't speak anymore and didn't remember anything or not to.
And the prosecution didn't want it pixilated because it was awful. And I did pixelate it because it was still awful, but just a bit less. But to be honest, that was quite a. That was a case in which I made sure that the jury panel knew what was coming.
And the prosecution didn't want it pixilated because it was awful. And I did pixelate it because it was still awful, but just a bit less. But to be honest, that was quite a. That was a case in which I made sure that the jury panel knew what was coming.
10:58
10:58
10:58
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
no, I don't it's not a game. I don't think people who prosecute at that level treat it in that way. And I think we all have a duty to juries, and we know that we discuss I mean, Council will discuss. I'll discuss prosecution defence way before the trial. How are we going to present this? How can we sanitise it? How can we make it an easier to do? And the defence, to be honest, are just as involved in trying to help because it is a it's a duty we all.
We don't want to cause people to be any more distressed than they have to be.
We don't want to cause people to be any more distressed than they have to be.
10:59
10:59
10:59
10:59
10:59
Lord Hogan-Howe
-
-
Lord Hogan-Howe
Sometimes obviously at some point may impact on sentencing. Yeah. But can I actually impact on the gravity of what the jury is having to consider? And I just wonder at times how much we protect people so much that they might be so clinical about this event, which actually is diabolically awful. And it might need to know that.
11:00
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I don't I don't from my experience, and that's having prosecuted defended murders. I don't think that's the case. I think judges understand and they will see what they need to see. I, you know, from your background, and you will know much more than me about whether police have wanted to use images and the court won't let them. But I don't think anyone could suggest that we that the images they get are cartoon like or sanitised to that extent, that isn't the point.
I think the problem that has arisen and Professor Thomas is not really on this so much, is the section 28 Pre-Trial Cross-Examination of children and others, where the statistics have shown that the Depersonalisation has seemed to reduce the conviction rate. So in. That's a different matter. But from what you're saying is your concerns are. Are we protecting them so much and are then then less likely to reach the right verdict? No, I don't think we're protecting them too much.
And no, I don't think they will, because I think a judge who understands the case and we will will know those that there will be images, as I have decided, that have to be seen, and there will be images that can be seen, sometimes less pictures, sometimes 4 or 5, not 20, that sort of thing, which is enough. But we do have to keep in mind what is necessary for the case. We're not there to win or lose. We're there to make sure the case is tried fairly.
I think the problem that has arisen and Professor Thomas is not really on this so much, is the section 28 Pre-Trial Cross-Examination of children and others, where the statistics have shown that the Depersonalisation has seemed to reduce the conviction rate. So in. That's a different matter. But from what you're saying is your concerns are. Are we protecting them so much and are then then less likely to reach the right verdict? No, I don't think we're protecting them too much.
And no, I don't think they will, because I think a judge who understands the case and we will will know those that there will be images, as I have decided, that have to be seen, and there will be images that can be seen, sometimes less pictures, sometimes 4 or 5, not 20, that sort of thing, which is enough. But we do have to keep in mind what is necessary for the case. We're not there to win or lose. We're there to make sure the case is tried fairly.
11:01
11:01
11:01
11:01
11:01
11:01
11:01
11:02
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It depends on the nature of the evidence. So it may simply be . This trial concerns allegations of child abuse, which come from the 1970s or 1980s. The nature of the abuse is serious and the allegations are of rape, indecent assault, whatever it is, because if it's before 2003, it will be under the old act, and then I and then I leave it at that. I don't give them that much. That's in a normal trial where where I think child abuse may be something that people may or may not want, need to know about in advance.
If it's something that has images, then what I do is I don't do it because I'm not on anyone's side, but I, in advance, with agreement of the defence and prosecution, ask the prosecution to read out a summary which we already know what he or she is going to say about the type of images they might see. And then I give them a little talk on experience in the criminal justice system, which is along the lines of the first time you see images, it's going to be really shocking.
You will be affected. But, but experience has taught all of us who do these cases year after year, that in the trial you will see these these same images a number of times. And as time goes on, your brain will start to process them and you will not suffer the same reaction as you did initially. So please bear that in mind. We've all had that experience and in all the trials I've done, that's exactly what's happened.
By the time the trial has ended in weeks eight, week two, they're able to they're watching the the images on the screen or they're looking at their files. And then they haven't got this upset face anymore. They've just got they're just looking at images, which then by then used to looking at. And they've understood because they've had a toxicologist and they've had this officer and they've had that witness, and they're able to process it because the brain will process it once.
Once it's got over the initial shock.
If it's something that has images, then what I do is I don't do it because I'm not on anyone's side, but I, in advance, with agreement of the defence and prosecution, ask the prosecution to read out a summary which we already know what he or she is going to say about the type of images they might see. And then I give them a little talk on experience in the criminal justice system, which is along the lines of the first time you see images, it's going to be really shocking.
You will be affected. But, but experience has taught all of us who do these cases year after year, that in the trial you will see these these same images a number of times. And as time goes on, your brain will start to process them and you will not suffer the same reaction as you did initially. So please bear that in mind. We've all had that experience and in all the trials I've done, that's exactly what's happened.
By the time the trial has ended in weeks eight, week two, they're able to they're watching the the images on the screen or they're looking at their files. And then they haven't got this upset face anymore. They've just got they're just looking at images, which then by then used to looking at. And they've understood because they've had a toxicologist and they've had this officer and they've had that witness, and they're able to process it because the brain will process it once.
Once it's got over the initial shock.
11:03
11:04
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I don't know, because at the college there's a division amongst all our judges, I don't know, it's 5050. Some of us feel strongly we should, and some of us feel strongly we shouldn't. So I don't know any more than that. That would be up to the Lady Chief Justice and others, but I. I personally think we should. But it doesn't mean everybody should or will. It's just because it works for me, and I feel that I.
It's worked for me because I haven't lost anyone in the trials where I've done a warning. No one has said day three or day four, I can't. I'm so. Dear judge, I'm really sorry I can't take this anymore. And I want to keep the trial together. My job is to start a trial and to finish it as quickly, efficiently and fairly as possible. That's it.
It's worked for me because I haven't lost anyone in the trials where I've done a warning. No one has said day three or day four, I can't. I'm so. Dear judge, I'm really sorry I can't take this anymore. And I want to keep the trial together. My job is to start a trial and to finish it as quickly, efficiently and fairly as possible. That's it.
11:04
11:04
11:04
11:04
11:04
Baroness Berridge
-
-
Baroness Berridge
Just firstly following on from the questions about the the changing of the evidence in prosecuting cases, is it affected by the resources that are available? So in murder, for instance, there seems to be in some, I'm colloquially told, an open ended pot of resources. But in other cases it's limited by the resources that are available to do all these changes. Is that correct?
11:05
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, the changes and it's not. So the prosecution still have a lot of resources, all the resources for murder, for attempt murder. It's dealt with usually by borrower, which is the local police, and they don't have the same resources. But as far as affecting jurors are concerned, no, I don't think so, because I think in cases with images prosecution, barrister, prosecution, CPS lawyers, defence and the judge are on it quite early on. And we know that we have to do things in a certain way in order to present them.
So I don't think even if it's just colour photocopying or scanning things, we'll find a way to do it. We had to make do and mend. For my whole life.
So I don't think even if it's just colour photocopying or scanning things, we'll find a way to do it. We had to make do and mend. For my whole life.
11:06
Baroness Berridge
-
-
Baroness Berridge
In relation to you, you've spoken a lot about the. And it seems like obviously we now know we've got a division here. It sounds like you've got best practice in your court, but can we just explore a bit about the before process or lack of process for jurors? Do you think that we should that jurors should be able to flag before the trial, particular trials that they will have difficult or proactively be told, you know, this is the nature of evidence, etcetera, before they're in the courtroom? Because as much as once you're in the courtroom, even you're stepping to the side and it's all you've made it as good as you can in the courtroom.
Once you're in there, it can be quite difficult for people to come forward.
Once you're in there, it can be quite difficult for people to come forward.
11:06
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It is. But I do think the person who can really the only person I think can answer that question correctly and well is Professor Thomas, because she's the only person in the country that's been given permission to talk to jurors after trials and ask them all these sorts of questions. We're never allowed to. So our our understanding will always be what we think has happened, not what we know has happened. And her understanding, she's done her paper, and I know she's in favour of there being more support as far as in advance is concerned.
I would be worried about sending jurors a summons that said, well, if you if you're particularly sensitive to X or Y, please tell us. I wouldn't want anything detailed. But I think what Thelma does at our court and I hope is done at other courts, I don't know but is told to contact the usher if there's any particular thing. And those for example, we have Jewish people and Muslim people. We have wood. Green's got the highest number of countries and races and languages and anywhere in the country.
So they will they will contact the court and say, you know, my daughter or my wife is doing jury service. And I think she would not be able to try a case of this nature. Then it goes to the resident judge and they will normally make adjustments, but I don't think we should ask them to do it, because that that would almost be like they were choosing their cases and that's why they can't. In
I would be worried about sending jurors a summons that said, well, if you if you're particularly sensitive to X or Y, please tell us. I wouldn't want anything detailed. But I think what Thelma does at our court and I hope is done at other courts, I don't know but is told to contact the usher if there's any particular thing. And those for example, we have Jewish people and Muslim people. We have wood. Green's got the highest number of countries and races and languages and anywhere in the country.
So they will they will contact the court and say, you know, my daughter or my wife is doing jury service. And I think she would not be able to try a case of this nature. Then it goes to the resident judge and they will normally make adjustments, but I don't think we should ask them to do it, because that that would almost be like they were choosing their cases and that's why they can't. In
11:07
11:08
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Usually by relatives on their behalf? But sometimes, and I don't, I'm not the resident, so I wouldn't get them necessarily. I might be told about them. That's all that sometimes if if a juror knows they've got a particular issue or even a. We have lots of physical issues as well. They will write in advance. And because there's room when you reply to say I have disability X, I have I impaired sight or I need a special chair or whatever it is.
So we do make the jury managers really sort that out.
So we do make the jury managers really sort that out.
11:08
11:08
11:08
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
-
-
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
These letters that you get from family members, are they citing religious objections to their wives or their daughters seeing hurtful evidence or hearing disturbing cases? Or is it more a question of of general protectiveness? And if and if the latter, then in a sense, what about all the other people that might have to hear this? Don't they have an equally strong.
11:08
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I don't, because if they go to the resident judge of the deputy resident and I'm in neither position, I don't see the letters. I'm just told that there was a letter and X has been excused from your case. There won't you won't she won't be on your jury panel, that's all. But I think there are religious objections sometimes, and I think there are more. She doesn't know about this sort of thing or affect her very adversely.
And as far as it affects other people, well, jury service is a civic duty. We we all believe in the jury system, and it is what it is. They often my feeling is when I'm doing a case which is very small and short and not very interesting, jurors resent that much more than. They resent serious cases. When they're trying a serious case, they take it really. They take it very carefully and responsibly, and they know that they're doing something really important.
And I think there's less resentment, not more resentment, because they realise how serious it is.
And as far as it affects other people, well, jury service is a civic duty. We we all believe in the jury system, and it is what it is. They often my feeling is when I'm doing a case which is very small and short and not very interesting, jurors resent that much more than. They resent serious cases. When they're trying a serious case, they take it really. They take it very carefully and responsibly, and they know that they're doing something really important.
And I think there's less resentment, not more resentment, because they realise how serious it is.
11:09
11:09
11:09
Baroness Bertin
-
-
Baroness Bertin
know, but I mean, I'm just meaning more actually the, you know, the person who's presumably over 18 and is a person in their own right. So I just find it interesting that they're being written to by family members saying what they can and can't do. And that strikes me as very controlling and worrying. It
11:10
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
is controlling and it is worrying. And I don't know how many times it happens. We'd have to ask resident judges that, but I know it has happened a number of times. My court, because I've been told about it. But and I know that we are conscious of the rights of the individual as well. We have had fathers who said, well, she can do jury service, but I want to sit in the public gallery with her.
And they've been told, no, you can't. But, you know, there are we have to manage a lot of different sensitivities and do our best. That's all we can do.
And they've been told, no, you can't. But, you know, there are we have to manage a lot of different sensitivities and do our best. That's all we can do.
11:10
11:10
Lord Foster of Bath
-
-
Lord Foster of Bath
Just before we move on to Lord Empey, you said something just in your remarks a few minutes ago that we've had to make do and mend all my career in all the areas that we're discussing. From everything you've said, it does seem that we really are making do and mend and that there hasn't been any overall agreed approach to the level of support to jurors, decisions about what evidence should or should not be put in front of them, and so on, am I? Is that a correct interpretation? No.
11:11
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think over time, because I've been doing it for so many long now, I think things have developed. We change our attitudes to things. We change our attitudes very much to admissibility of different types of evidence. A witness of sexual history, for example. It's very difficult to ask about now. When I started, you could ask anything you wanted, of anyone you wanted. So I think we change and we grow.
And that's part of what the judicial college is about, teaching us to grow with changing times in our society. So no, I don't I don't think that. I
And that's part of what the judicial college is about, teaching us to grow with changing times in our society. So no, I don't I don't think that. I
11:11
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I think make do and mend is, is more to do with the buildings and more to do. When I was prosecuting and I said, I need some treasury tags and some rubber bands while Kelly dear, if you want them, bring your own. I said, files, pens, highlighters, post-it notes. Yep. Bring your own. So that's what I meant by make, do and mend. We just do our best and we just try and run the system as well as we can.
11:12
11:12
11:12
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, deliberate deliberations as far as research is concerned for people like Cheryl Thomas. Yes, absolutely. I would, because they're best research can only be done if they're able to talk about deliberations, because things may have been said and discussed in deliberations, which is part of the research. And she needs to be able to teach us how to improve that or let us know what the problems are that we can deal with. And she helps us by writing directions, lecturing, etc..
Therapeutic. Yes. This is something which a number of, of, of judges have raised and members of staff with me that they think that this automatic bar of being able to discuss something that happened in deliberations should not be there. If the person who is giving the counselling is a properly accredited and properly trained and understands the sensitivity and security, because if someone, say, has had a trauma reaction, they may have had PTSD as a child, something may have happened, then this has triggered if something has happened during the deliberations, which is the thing that the AM eMDR needs to focus on.
That was the event, the triggering event. Then how are they going to get the help they need unless they have someone that they can talk to? You
Therapeutic. Yes. This is something which a number of, of, of judges have raised and members of staff with me that they think that this automatic bar of being able to discuss something that happened in deliberations should not be there. If the person who is giving the counselling is a properly accredited and properly trained and understands the sensitivity and security, because if someone, say, has had a trauma reaction, they may have had PTSD as a child, something may have happened, then this has triggered if something has happened during the deliberations, which is the thing that the AM eMDR needs to focus on.
That was the event, the triggering event. Then how are they going to get the help they need unless they have someone that they can talk to? You
11:13
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
can decompress about the trial in general and about jury service in general, but I don't know, because then something may have happened in the discussions, which was the trigger. So if you're having eMDR, they want to know what what happened, what the trigger was. Then they give you exercises and rapid eye movement lights to go through that trigger over and over again until you stop reacting to it. And if they can't discuss that part. So in other words, they can discuss 770% of it, but 30% is removed, then that might inhibit those who do suffer some sort of adverse reaction from getting the help.
But I think it should be carefully considered by people much more important than me, and dealt with in a very secure and very careful way, because I always give that we all have to give that. At the end of the trial. You can now the trial is over. You can now discuss anything that happened in this room, in court with anyone you like, but never discuss anything that was said in the jury room to anyone, ever. And they do take it seriously.
And they then, as I understand it, become frightened and they don't know whether they can even tell a counsellor.
But I think it should be carefully considered by people much more important than me, and dealt with in a very secure and very careful way, because I always give that we all have to give that. At the end of the trial. You can now the trial is over. You can now discuss anything that happened in this room, in court with anyone you like, but never discuss anything that was said in the jury room to anyone, ever. And they do take it seriously.
And they then, as I understand it, become frightened and they don't know whether they can even tell a counsellor.
11:14
11:14
Lord Empey
-
-
Lord Empey
The whole. Everything's completely different, completely different. I would have to say I wouldn't want us to go down that direction. But no, no, no, I'm just saying it is a big issue right now because we and then of course, other countries treat jurors in a different way. So have you any views on your more content with the way this country deals with it, or do you see examples, examples of better practice elsewhere?
11:15
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Again, I think others are better because they. Professor Thomas has written giving you the links for Canada and other places, and I understand that. But I think as far as I think we deal with it well in this country, but I think we could deal with it a lot better. And this is an area juror deliberations, which will have to be very carefully considered by very senior people for a long time before we can reach, I think, a level of safe agreement.
But in my view, it should there should be some sort of permission once you've sought permission, because say, for example, your psychiatrist says, I need to discuss this with Miss So-and-so, but she can't reveal it to me because it's part of her deliberations. May I please have the permission to discuss it with her? And then whoever it was would give permission or not give permission, because it is very serious. And our our oaths and our promises are sacrosanct.
And they've been made to promise they'll never talk about it. And they they do take it seriously. And I don't want them to feel that is being run over or ignored.
But in my view, it should there should be some sort of permission once you've sought permission, because say, for example, your psychiatrist says, I need to discuss this with Miss So-and-so, but she can't reveal it to me because it's part of her deliberations. May I please have the permission to discuss it with her? And then whoever it was would give permission or not give permission, because it is very serious. And our our oaths and our promises are sacrosanct.
And they've been made to promise they'll never talk about it. And they they do take it seriously. And I don't want them to feel that is being run over or ignored.
11:16
11:16
11:16
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Well, again, there's teaching. There are lots of cases in which it has happened, and we have the decisions of the Court of Appeal, which is basically this is how that judge dealt with it. It was right. If it happens to you, deal with it this way. So often we will follow steps again, it's in it's in the compendium and it's also in criminal practice direction. Eight we'll follow the practice. We'll also follow our gut instincts, which sometimes is go home.
Now it's 330. Come back in the morning and let's have a see if we can have a fresh approach. And then to give them little talks on you must respect each other's views. It's very important to do this, that and the other and hope you can keep them on board. There have been trials which have had to be discharged. It doesn't happen often, but it has happened where the jury themselves have fallen out to such an extent they had to be discharged.
I had one trial at the Bailey where I was defending a child rape, where I was outside the courtroom and we heard fighting. The officer in the case was standing over there. I was by the lifts, and one juror was beating up another juror, and she ran over, broke it up, and then ran to me and said, I don't know what to do, miss. And I said, right, we'll both go home. We make statements. We'll bring it tomorrow. We give it to the judge and he'll decide what to do.
And he discharged the jury. But you know those things sometimes, not often, but happen.
Now it's 330. Come back in the morning and let's have a see if we can have a fresh approach. And then to give them little talks on you must respect each other's views. It's very important to do this, that and the other and hope you can keep them on board. There have been trials which have had to be discharged. It doesn't happen often, but it has happened where the jury themselves have fallen out to such an extent they had to be discharged.
I had one trial at the Bailey where I was defending a child rape, where I was outside the courtroom and we heard fighting. The officer in the case was standing over there. I was by the lifts, and one juror was beating up another juror, and she ran over, broke it up, and then ran to me and said, I don't know what to do, miss. And I said, right, we'll both go home. We make statements. We'll bring it tomorrow. We give it to the judge and he'll decide what to do.
And he discharged the jury. But you know those things sometimes, not often, but happen.
11:17
11:17
Baroness Berridge
-
-
Baroness Berridge
If you're a juror and you happen to be in a court where they don't have the practice that you have in relation to introducing the case, and you find it, and we've had evidence that some jurors find it deeply distressing. It makes them poorly, they get PTSD, etc.. Do they have any legal remedy that a duty of care to them because other jurors are having. We now know from you a very different experience of, of, of consideration and care.
Do they in law have a legal remedy? I
Do they in law have a legal remedy? I
11:18
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
don't know, I don't think so, but I don't know because that's not my area. And we have a duty of care , thanks to my litigation judges have because they didn't have before 2021. So we have and the staff have always had because they were under the MoJ. But the MoJ then accepted. They also have a duty of care to 5500 judges. I don't know about juries and I don't know, therefore, if they could litigate.
11:18
11:18
11:18
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
10 to 1 and then 2 to 430 and we normally have a break. Well, I normally have break mid-morning. Most judges have a break mid-morning for the jury of about 30 minutes, but not necessarily in the afternoon. But those are the hours that they sit. But or less if so, at the moment because of the backlog, we all have to do extra cases every morning, in which case we'll always tell the jury, come in at 11, come in at 1130.
So they're not waiting around any more than they have to. And we deal with other cases before they come or after they go.
So they're not waiting around any more than they have to. And we deal with other cases before they come or after they go.
11:19
11:19
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
-
-
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
Thank you, chair. I'm thinking particularly now this is the last question about support for jurors. We've heard from some people researching in this area of things they'd quite like us to recommend to government to improve the situation regarding support for for jurors, whether that be about pre-trial information, about emotional impact, whether it's about things you've raised, standard of accommodation and the experience, whether it's about post-trial support. You've mentioned disclosure, so I won't go over that, but are there particular things that you would feel are a priority for the MoJ to think about in terms of support for jurors? I
11:19
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
think there should be a website for jurors that they can go on. I mean, there's a lot on YouTube. So if they want to look, if they're interested, there's there's stuff there. But a site for jurors, which just explains about jury service, gives you a sort of general introduction, gentle introduction to. I think that the way we, I think and I've got the figures, if you need them, the amounts of money they're given for day to day work and those who are self-employed, those who need childcare, those who need special transport, even food.
Food is £5.71 a day. There used to be a card that they used at the canteen which which they made sure there was enough for them to have a hot drink, a cold drink or something to eat. But now the MoJ prefer them to submit afterwards and they get £5.75 a day anyway. It's not , it's not that they're not going to get it, but we have we have people who are very poor in our area, and I don't want them to have to claim at the end.
And I think there should be a way in which they can choose a card, or you can claim at the end, so that those who need food as they're going along should be able to get it only in those courts that have and we have catering. Not every court has, but if it doesn't have, then it should be a card that they can use at a local sandwich bar or something like that. Because I do think we've got to we expect them to do a lot.
Our accommodation is not good in most courts. For jurors, it's not terrible. They don't even have a kettle and they can't even bring in their own, you know, their own stuff and make cups of tea. And I think we've got to think about just day to day comfort levels. And some courts they have. So we had a court at Hendon. We used the magistrates court for the for extra courts, and we're about to get them back.
And they're the jury rooms because they're. The old magistrates rooms are lovely. They've got they've got a fridge, a microwave, a kettle. It's fantastic. And I just think they should always have that. And we should. Some of our jury rooms aren't even usable because every time it rains, the roof goes down. So they have to wait until those rooms are dry to use them. And then it's that bad. They're not great furniture.
There's things like that that they could really improve. I know it sounds trivial, but if you've got to, if you've got to sit somewhere for weeks and weeks, absolutely, at least two weeks. That's jury service. You just don't want people to know that you respect them, you welcome them, and you're doing your best to make them as comfortable as possible. That's all we can do. But I do worry. I think they should improve the payment structure.
They should be more interested in jurors who need childcare or need can't get to court easily because they don't have transport, and they may not be well enough to take public transport and arrangements can be made, but they're not very often made. So I do think we should think more about them than than there has been.
Food is £5.71 a day. There used to be a card that they used at the canteen which which they made sure there was enough for them to have a hot drink, a cold drink or something to eat. But now the MoJ prefer them to submit afterwards and they get £5.75 a day anyway. It's not , it's not that they're not going to get it, but we have we have people who are very poor in our area, and I don't want them to have to claim at the end.
And I think there should be a way in which they can choose a card, or you can claim at the end, so that those who need food as they're going along should be able to get it only in those courts that have and we have catering. Not every court has, but if it doesn't have, then it should be a card that they can use at a local sandwich bar or something like that. Because I do think we've got to we expect them to do a lot.
Our accommodation is not good in most courts. For jurors, it's not terrible. They don't even have a kettle and they can't even bring in their own, you know, their own stuff and make cups of tea. And I think we've got to think about just day to day comfort levels. And some courts they have. So we had a court at Hendon. We used the magistrates court for the for extra courts, and we're about to get them back.
And they're the jury rooms because they're. The old magistrates rooms are lovely. They've got they've got a fridge, a microwave, a kettle. It's fantastic. And I just think they should always have that. And we should. Some of our jury rooms aren't even usable because every time it rains, the roof goes down. So they have to wait until those rooms are dry to use them. And then it's that bad. They're not great furniture.
There's things like that that they could really improve. I know it sounds trivial, but if you've got to, if you've got to sit somewhere for weeks and weeks, absolutely, at least two weeks. That's jury service. You just don't want people to know that you respect them, you welcome them, and you're doing your best to make them as comfortable as possible. That's all we can do. But I do worry. I think they should improve the payment structure.
They should be more interested in jurors who need childcare or need can't get to court easily because they don't have transport, and they may not be well enough to take public transport and arrangements can be made, but they're not very often made. So I do think we should think more about them than than there has been.
11:22
11:22
11:22
11:22
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
They would welcome more training. And I think, as I said, I think sometimes juries, jury systems work more because of the people being good than because the Ministry of Justice or Hmcts are training them. Well, we're depending too much on luck and lucky to have good staff, and I don't. Yes, they are good staff and I'm glad. But we we need to really enforce the training and the support for them so that when they're trained, it's not just they have to do that.
It's we understand this and do it in this way. Come to us if you need help. And and every so often to check in with the staff. Are you under a lot of pressure? Have you had a terrible time in the jury office in the last month? I mean, some of them just asked to be transferred out because they can't take it. So it is you see their faces, they're white with exhaustion of being constantly I need this, I need that.
I can't come tomorrow. But you should have told me. Oh yeah, I forgot. And that's just one. And if we've got 11, well, ten courts with juries, there's a lot of things to answer with a lot of juries. Thank
It's we understand this and do it in this way. Come to us if you need help. And and every so often to check in with the staff. Are you under a lot of pressure? Have you had a terrible time in the jury office in the last month? I mean, some of them just asked to be transferred out because they can't take it. So it is you see their faces, they're white with exhaustion of being constantly I need this, I need that.
I can't come tomorrow. But you should have told me. Oh yeah, I forgot. And that's just one. And if we've got 11, well, ten courts with juries, there's a lot of things to answer with a lot of juries. Thank
11:23
11:23
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I don't know, but I think so. I think there is. But I think that we tell the Samaritans that they're given a leaflet at the end about the Samaritans, but I think a lot of people wouldn't necessarily feel comfortable ringing the Samaritans unless they were, say, suicidal. And they don't think, well, I'm not that. And I think a lot of people are shy about using services. And I think men and that includes male judges, male staff and male.
Everybody's don't feel comfortable about accessing any kind of support, which is why I think maybe using some of the NHS AI tools might bring those people a bit out of their shells, and it might be easier for everybody. But the staff definitely need more proactive management and support than they receive at the moment. And recognition in terms, I'm sorry, I shouldn't talk about their salaries, but these are front level staffs that are facing the world every day and even at grade D in in Hmcts, it's paid less than grade D at the Mod.
We've got to decide whether we care about jurors, whether we care about the court system. I'm not saying that if you pay £300,000 a year, but what I'm saying is recognise and treat them with dignity, because these are really important people that keep the court running, the people that bring them to court, the people that look after them in the dock, that all the staff, the jury managers, and they really do a brilliant job on the whole. And they really do deserve much more recognition than they get.
Thank
Everybody's don't feel comfortable about accessing any kind of support, which is why I think maybe using some of the NHS AI tools might bring those people a bit out of their shells, and it might be easier for everybody. But the staff definitely need more proactive management and support than they receive at the moment. And recognition in terms, I'm sorry, I shouldn't talk about their salaries, but these are front level staffs that are facing the world every day and even at grade D in in Hmcts, it's paid less than grade D at the Mod.
We've got to decide whether we care about jurors, whether we care about the court system. I'm not saying that if you pay £300,000 a year, but what I'm saying is recognise and treat them with dignity, because these are really important people that keep the court running, the people that bring them to court, the people that look after them in the dock, that all the staff, the jury managers, and they really do a brilliant job on the whole. And they really do deserve much more recognition than they get.
Thank
11:24
11:25
Lord Foster of Bath
-
-
Lord Foster of Bath
Thank you very much indeed, Carly. That's been absolutely fascinating. We I know we've all learned a great deal from you. One of the problems with these sessions is you think of things afterwards that you wish you'd said. Please feel free to put it down on a piece of paper and get it to us. But if you can do it as quickly as possible, that would be very helpful indeed. But on behalf of the entire committee, thank you very much indeed.
Order, order! The sitting is suspended. Welcome to this third session of the Justice and Home Affairs Select Committee into inquiry into Support for jurors. And we're absolutely delighted to have two further witnesses with us. Thank you very much for being here. Perhaps you'd help us by just kick off. Just give us your name and your role.
Order, order! The sitting is suspended. Welcome to this third session of the Justice and Home Affairs Select Committee into inquiry into Support for jurors. And we're absolutely delighted to have two further witnesses with us. Thank you very much for being here. Perhaps you'd help us by just kick off. Just give us your name and your role.
11:32
11:32
11:32
11:32
Baroness Buscombe
-
-
Baroness Buscombe
Thank you. Bearing in mind that this is for public broadcast. First of all, thank you both very much for coming. But also making the point up front. I think it's important that barristers are bluntly self-employed. So your situation may be very different. But we're going to hear from you from, say, jurors or judges or both. Can I ask, therefore, what support is a barrister? What access do you have to support as barristers with regard to difficult cases? And how frequently is that support taken up? Could I start possibly with you, Philip, as a practising barrister?
11:33
11:33
11:33
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
And also access to GP. services for those who pay an additional fee. What percentage of that is dealing with the sort of issues that we're discussing today in terms of distressing cases isn't available to us because it's also used for other things like financial issues or. substance addiction issues, or the vast range of issues that can affect people. That's obviously self-employed barristers, as you've pointed out, Baroness, and in terms of employed.
11:33
11:33
11:34
11:34
11:34
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Made that call to the helpline? Yes I do. I have myself not necessarily about these issues, but other issues. And I know that other people have. And also at the. self-employed bar, I think it's right to stress that there's the. community that we have. There's the Criminal Bar Association, there's also the.
11:34
11:34
11:34
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
rely very heavily on your friends and your colleagues to talk through matters. I know in my chambers we offer what's called a listening service. So maybe half a dozen of us went and got some training to be able to talk to people who were. undergoing mental health issues, and again, across the wide range of issues, not specifically just this. And I know that . That's something
11:35
11:35
Baroness Buscombe
-
-
Baroness Buscombe
been used on occasion by people in my own chambers, because I think it's quite important that to. emphasize how different a set of chambers can be from a normal office. situation where your living, breathing with these people, but your. relationship generally goes further, doesn't it, than the. 9 to 5 because of the world you inhabit and the life you lead. I just think it's quite important. I mean, I speak as someone who was practising at the bar years ago to, to .
Emphasize
Emphasize
11:35
11:35
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Though obviously there is the robing room. camaraderie and your own friendships there. So therefore, I think we perhaps almost instinctively reinforce that by forming those kind of. friendships and those support groups to be able to talk to one another. And you will know the phoning up people for advice is a sort of an. inherently ingrained as part of your training, always phone .
11:36
11:36
11:36
11:36
11:36
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
The CPS service, I should say, is also open to self-employed barristers as well as their own employees. In addition to that, the Inns of Court College of. Advocacy two years ago and I was involved in that, wrote a trauma informed. advocacy course. And part of that is about reflecting on how we deal with witnesses and victims. But another part is about our own. vicarious or secondary trauma that we. experience and self care and some.
resources there, which are quite.
resources there, which are quite.
11:37
11:37
11:37
11:37
11:37
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I think it might be useful to look at some of those resources, as well as just a. therapeutic based one. We found, I would say, that there were lots of informal support for. barristers going back some years, but. actually some of the remote working and the fact that our cases are held. digitally means that there isn't that traditional. 5:00 everyone back in the building for the distribution of papers.
And I think that. combined with the the higher rates of trials being sex, rape, rape, or other sexual.
And I think that. combined with the the higher rates of trials being sex, rape, rape, or other sexual.
11:38
11:38
11:38
11:38
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Means that the need has gone up. And so locally and I'm based in the North East, we, we, I consulted with a therapist and they explained that really we needed to have a three pronged approach. So to just introduce therapy on its own or a counselling service would not have a significant take up unless you sort of. normalised that and educated people about how that would help. So in addition to our counselling support service that we have in chambers and across circuit, which is run by Wendy Nicholas, who's specialised in this area, we also run education on.
11:38
11:38
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Sleep, healthy habits in terms of separating your work and your home life. And we've combined that also with a social informal element. And we found that the triumvirate of those support services has made a difference. And I have taken up the support. I've spent a lot of time. prosecuting heavy sex cases and in particular the grooming cases, and they took their toll. And I did console and got support from the therapists that I've mentioned, and I've been very open in the criminal bar community about how helpful that has been for me, again, to try and.
normalise and, and make it kind of open discussion for people to be able to talk about how deep and.
normalise and, and make it kind of open discussion for people to be able to talk about how deep and.
11:39
11:39
11:40
11:40
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
should say counsel, will have been present. physically in a courtroom in front of a jury in the Crown court. But I think particularly in those early days when our most junior members are picking up. cases and may have to dip in and out of a number of small cases, all of which might have a fairly traumatic element to them. We don't want to see an end to remote working, but we do have to note that we have to put different support services in.
Then,
Then,
11:40
11:40
11:40
11:40
11:41
11:41
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Perhaps the first thing to think about is how we really do keep an eye on trying to limit the amount of traumatic material we. expose jurors and of course, therefore court staff as well, everyone in that courtroom to that material. And I think we need to just sort of. recognise that every. prosecutor should be and are reviewing that material to see what do we really have to show the jury there? We don't, just because there is a video that depicts, perhaps the offence, we don't just play that and expose that.
Just as we don't routinely show photographs of a post-mortem in a, in a, in a murder trial. So the first stage is to try and look at what we can. reduce either through.
Just as we don't routinely show photographs of a post-mortem in a, in a, in a murder trial. So the first stage is to try and look at what we can. reduce either through.
11:41
11:41
11:41
11:41
11:41
11:42
11:42
11:42
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
To jurors because it is significant to the case or the point that we're trying to prove, and that we have to accept that. In terms of other. mitigations and support, I think we'll come on to the sort of early questioning of jurors as to as to whether or not the material is such that they're able to hold true to their oaths. In terms of that. questioning . And what we have seen outside of the pilot that's been taking place is that at the end of the case, outside of that pilot, jurors are just told that if they need further support, they can contact GP or the Samaritans.
And I think it is it is that really that perhaps needs some some further. consideration of some more.
And I think it is it is that really that perhaps needs some some further. consideration of some more.
11:42
11:42
Lord Hogan-Howe
-
-
Lord Hogan-Howe
Rather than the generic Samaritan phone line? Do you think that in any way? I've just asked to judge. So I have to ask you as well, is that by holding back some of the evidence for the reasons you've explained, and that empathy for somebody who might be affected by it, is there any danger at times that the quality of the evidence is affected to the point where the jury . Might
11:43
11:43
11:43
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
I wait and see what the issue is going to be. First of all, is it identification? Is it was there penetration? What is the specific issue? Once I know that, I will ensure I'm afraid, however difficult the material is, that the jury have what they need to make that decision. If I can. pixelate or blur or use some other method without damaging the case, I will do so.
But
But
11:43
11:43
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
will simply have to open it. introduce it, explain. They're going to have that distressing material shown to them. I might take other steps, such as not placing it in the jury bundle, where they're going to come across it. inadvertently flicking through the pages. But I might control it such that we show it on a screen at specific.
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:44
11:44
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
decision. Thank you. Anything you want to add? I argue that it's really rare that we would put forward like, indecent images of children. They would have to be some sort of. overriding need to prove it. But Carl was entirely right. When there is, you do. What you can't get away from, of course. Is that all. exhibits witness. testimony can sometimes be incredibly distressing and for all sorts of reasons, and you can't get away from that.
But also, jurors are told that they must judge cases, not on emotion. And so it's in everybody's interest to keep the most distressing parts away from it, unless there is some real evidential reason to do it. And actually, I think.
But also, jurors are told that they must judge cases, not on emotion. And so it's in everybody's interest to keep the most distressing parts away from it, unless there is some real evidential reason to do it. And actually, I think.
11:45
11:45
11:45
11:45
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It's all computer generated graphics in the most part, and they actually find it. interesting rather than repulsive. And some of the research says that jurors, when they first turn up, maybe. 8 in 10 .. Are nervous about it, want to get out of it if they possibly can. But actually, by the end of the.
11:45
11:45
11:45
11:45
Lord Hogan-Howe
-
-
Lord Hogan-Howe
11:46
11:46
11:46
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
about whether that starts to get towards jury selection? Yes, I think that is a real difficult constitutional problem, because we in this jurisdiction do not self-select by voir dire or jury questionnaire or those kinds of issues. The question is, what we do do is we say, you know, are you able to sit on this jury? Is there any reason you can't sometimes for mundane issues, I have a pre-booked operation or holiday or whatever, and I can't make the length of trial.
And so there might be a position where you might be able to say something like, this is about the death of a child. And if somebody then says, I simply can't do that in the same way they might for health reason, I mean, it is a psychological health reason. There might be some ability to do that. But part of the reason why. jurors jury verdicts are so respected in this. jurisdiction is the Bar Council thinks , because we have random.
jurors and they come with all their life.
And so there might be a position where you might be able to say something like, this is about the death of a child. And if somebody then says, I simply can't do that in the same way they might for health reason, I mean, it is a psychological health reason. There might be some ability to do that. But part of the reason why. jurors jury verdicts are so respected in this. jurisdiction is the Bar Council thinks , because we have random.
jurors and they come with all their life.
11:47
11:47
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Good or bad. And actually that produces. results because when there is a miscarriage of justice, people don't blame the jury. They never blame the jury. It's the prosecution's fault. It's the disclosure. It might be the way the judge directs the jury. It might be incompetence of counsel. But people rarely say . The
11:47
11:47
11:47
11:47
11:48
11:48
11:48
11:48
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Responsibility lies. Are you happy with. I think that's ultimately the case. I think there are lots of. organisations and I think we have to include the Crown. Prosecution Service in that as well, who routinely, of course, contract to the. independent bar. But yes, I that is part of the problem, of course, is that if we were.
11:48
11:48
11:48
11:49
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Lies for for jurors. Well, I think. ultimately the government in the form of the Lord Chancellor, because it is His Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service who summons them. And it is. Hmcts and the government who pay the judges now on an individual basis. It's obviously the role of the judge in the individual case to manage that case as . He or
11:49
11:49
11:49
11:49
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:50
11:51
11:51
11:51
11:51
Baroness Berridge
-
-
Baroness Berridge
that responsibility. Baroness Berridge Yes, just in relation to we've heard that there are obviously some judges that give particular directions and invite people to come forward and other judges who don't have that practice. Now, if you ask as a juror to be excused, you say, I can't hear this case because, you know, I've had a child that's died or something like that, but you're not recused from the jury. Do you have any legal remedy? That's my first question.
Would you have any kind of to go further than that? The second thing is, if you happen to be a juror in a trial where there's no. direction and you end up seriously poorly, do you have do you have any legal redress for being made poorly through this system? When in another .
Would you have any kind of to go further than that? The second thing is, if you happen to be a juror in a trial where there's no. direction and you end up seriously poorly, do you have do you have any legal redress for being made poorly through this system? When in another .
11:51
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Court, you might have been treated very differently because of a different judge? I'm not aware of that. Being tested in any sort of vicarious trauma case that's been brought against the. judiciary or the state by by a juror. And I defer to Phillip if he has done. I think it is it is about whether or not they can be true to their oaths, really, to to draw and make the decision based on the evidence before them.
So just to go back to one of the issues that was raised before in terms of our selection and making sure that we do have a randomly selected. jury with, with, with a lot of different life experiences. I, I know that sort of straying slightly. One of the needs for caution that I would say is that we have to. recognise how many. And in particular it is women will have. experienced either a sexual assault or domestic abuse.
What we don't want to see is such people have had life.
So just to go back to one of the issues that was raised before in terms of our selection and making sure that we do have a randomly selected. jury with, with, with a lot of different life experiences. I, I know that sort of straying slightly. One of the needs for caution that I would say is that we have to. recognise how many. And in particular it is women will have. experienced either a sexual assault or domestic abuse.
What we don't want to see is such people have had life.
11:52
11:52
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
From our juries, because they've made an important part of it. A lot of emphasis is on the juror to raise that frankly, that if they are having signs of distress or emotion, that that is having an impact upon them, they do need to raise it. And I have never seen a juror raise that to the point where it's making them unwell. And a judge simply says,
11:53
11:53
11:53
11:53
11:53
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
But it might be embarrassing for them to do that. Indeed, indeed, except most. communication is not done through a juror walking in and having to announce it. They would speak privately, quietly, to an usher who was often formed something of a relationship with them all through a handwritten note that was handed up privately. So whilst I take that on board, it can be embarrassing to even admit it sometimes or to come to terms with it themselves.
There are . Mechanisms
There are . Mechanisms
11:53
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
where they don't have to do that very publicly. I think it's very interesting legal question that you've raised, and the Bar Council is currently intervening in a Supreme Court case about due to be heard, I think, next month across the way in terms of advocates immunity from suit, because advocates are immune from being sued by anybody other than their own client in negligence. And that's the question for the Supreme Court, whether that should remain. What you what is not under any dispute is judicial immunity from suit.
You couldn't sue a judge as a juror. The Lord Chancellor in. Hmcts would undoubtedly have their own .
You couldn't sue a judge as a juror. The Lord Chancellor in. Hmcts would undoubtedly have their own .
11:54
11:54
11:54
11:54
11:54
11:54
11:55
11:55
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
-
-
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
The judge, if necessary, rules and a picture might be pixelated if that bit of the picture is not actually relevant to any issue, the jury is going to have to decide. But if, on the other hand it is, then the jury will have to see it. Shocking as it is. You also mentioned that oral evidence can be shocking too, and that that can't be predicted in advance. Could you just talk us through for the benefit of those of us who are not familiar with a courtroom, as to who would have a responsibility if a witness starts being quite gratuitous or quite shocking in the way they express.
themselves plainly, that might be relevant to what the jury have to decide. But it might not. Could anything be done in that courtroom. context to without in any way limiting the freedom of the witness to say what is .
themselves plainly, that might be relevant to what the jury have to decide. But it might not. Could anything be done in that courtroom. context to without in any way limiting the freedom of the witness to say what is .
11:55
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Relevant to avoid undue distress to the jury? I've had a similar experience last month in the case that I was dealing with, because I was engaged in a what's called a cut throat defence, which you all know is where two defendants are blaming each other . And a one defendant said that they had been forced to commit the crime by the second. defendant and not. previously highlighted in any interview or defence statement.
Started talking about because it was a husband and wife started talking about how the husband had forced her to have an abortion and had raped her while she was having medical treatment. And that was something which obviously nobody had predicted could not be. It was being said as part of the defendant's evidence was. relevant because she was saying, I've been.
Started talking about because it was a husband and wife started talking about how the husband had forced her to have an abortion and had raped her while she was having medical treatment. And that was something which obviously nobody had predicted could not be. It was being said as part of the defendant's evidence was. relevant because she was saying, I've been.
11:56
11:56
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
But there had been no ability to sort of say to a juror before that point, because nobody had known she was going to say that, not even her own lawyers. I suspect that, by the way, this is a topic that's going to come up that might well be the sort of thing that causes distress to somebody for all sorts of reasons. And what can be done about that, and very little in the sense of obviously, the opposing party can object.
And if very people are very quick to get to their feet and object, if they're going down a route which they think is going to be prejudicial to their client's case, and the judges are also very keen to control it. But that comes back to my point about oral testimony, which is we do it in a formalized way, which does help, I think, limit the impact.
And if very people are very quick to get to their feet and object, if they're going down a route which they think is going to be prejudicial to their client's case, and the judges are also very keen to control it. But that comes back to my point about oral testimony, which is we do it in a formalized way, which does help, I think, limit the impact.
11:57
11:57
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Somebody saying something can be very upsetting. But jurors. overall are robust adults, and I think they. appreciate the service that they're being asked to do, and they perform it very well. And, and what that comes then to is what can you do afterwards to help those people? Even if you can't eliminate the risk of something like what . I'm
11:57
11:57
11:57
11:57
11:57
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
-
-
Lord Anderson of Ipswich
Yes. Anything to add? No, no, I'm content with that. One more question then, if I may. Slightly different one. It touches on this issue of of informal jury selection. We have received evidence that there are. occasions on which a judge or more likely, a court will receive a letter or a. communication either from an individual or possibly from a family member of that.
individual saying, I don't want my daughter, my wife or myself to be. exposed to disgusting evidence or to have to think about sex cases or anything like that. Please ensure that I they don't have to sit on one. Now. I appreciate we should probably really be talking to a panel of judges, but that's rather an unlikely prospect in Parliament. So it's just really to ask whether that's a practice that you have any awareness of,
individual saying, I don't want my daughter, my wife or myself to be. exposed to disgusting evidence or to have to think about sex cases or anything like that. Please ensure that I they don't have to sit on one. Now. I appreciate we should probably really be talking to a panel of judges, but that's rather an unlikely prospect in Parliament. So it's just really to ask whether that's a practice that you have any awareness of,
11:58
11:58
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Whether you think whether you have any views on it. Yeah. I've had some limited. experience of of that where views it has been expressed that they don't they didn't want to. And that is very. different to it having a traumatic impact upon them such that it's. distressing or that it's going to do them long term harm in some way. If somebody either were doing harm to an individual or they can't be true to their oaths, most judges will not have a difficulty with.
excusing that person from that jury service on that trial, but simply a. preference if it's put in that way of quite what trial they would like to hear in their two week jury service, it is not accommodated.
excusing that person from that jury service on that trial, but simply a. preference if it's put in that way of quite what trial they would like to hear in their two week jury service, it is not accommodated.
11:59
11:59
11:59
11:59
11:59
11:59
11:59
11:59
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00
12:00
Baroness Bertin
-
-
Baroness Bertin
a juror. Thank you very much on that. So we did hear we have heard on the grapevine, I should say that some letters are going in from, let's say, fathers from certain religious communities saying they don't want their daughters to sit on certain trials for, you know, sex trials, essentially. Yes. Could you I mean,
12:01
12:01
12:01
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Really, of the basis upon which an adult who has gone, not children over which a parent can dictate or or indicate their views as to what another adult can do on jury service. I would have to say that I don't anticipate that is a particularly. widespread issue. I have seen letters written from family members. Sometimes a disgruntled husband has written, you know, to try and say that caused problems for a juror.
I mean, odd things do occur, but it is not, in my opinion. And I work. predominantly in an area where there is a. significant Asian community. If that's what's being suggested, that comes . From that
I mean, odd things do occur, but it is not, in my opinion. And I work. predominantly in an area where there is a. significant Asian community. If that's what's being suggested, that comes . From that
12:01
12:01
12:02
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
experience at all. I've never seen it in 20 plus years. Okay. And I think it may be also comes back to the point I was making about the what research there is from Professor Cheryl Thomas at UCL. People are nervous about. People don't know what being on a jury is like. They have all sorts of ideas about it. But actually, if you stick with it and go through it, people come through and they're actually much.
They realize it's not as bad as they think. It must be very scary turning up to a court for the first time. You have all these.
They realize it's not as bad as they think. It must be very scary turning up to a court for the first time. You have all these.
12:02
12:02
12:02
12:02
12:02
12:02
12:02
12:03
12:03
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Credence given to those sorts of yes, indeed, they came in. And I think picking up on on that notes from jurors, unless they fall into particular categories about voting numbers or deliberations. So counsel can't see them. Notes from jurors about particular issues are not just dealt with privately. They are put on a court record. They are discussed with barristers. So we wouldn't have a large segment of potential jurors removed from a voting from a jury pool because family members had written in, and we wouldn't just not .
Be
Be
12:03
12:03
Baroness Bertin
-
-
Baroness Bertin
Yes. Next. So, look, I'm conscious that you have spoken a little bit about this already, so I don't want you to duplicate, but if you could just give a little bit more detail about the. information that you do provide to jurors regarding distressing evidence. And perhaps, you know, as I've said, you come and thank you for, for, for, for giving a little bit of detail in previous answers. But is there a general guidance or is it very much kind of, you know, each judge, each .
Barrister,
Barrister,
12:04
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
you know, does what they they sort of feel is right. Yes. I think first of all, the lead will normally come from the judge in a trial where we know there's going to be particular distressing material. So that might come when we come to jury selection. Sometimes there's a written document, if it's a lengthy case with the names of the witnesses or the geographical areas that might at that stage where we're pulling the jury and nobody then has been.
12:04
12:04
12:04
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
That will be handled in a particular way. So telling the jury what they're going to see and how it's going to be managed, and whatever safeguards we've put upon it, whether it's through. pixelation or don't worry, it's not in the bundle. You're not just going to come or we're going to watch it all together. Our experience has shown . Some of
12:05
12:05
12:05
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
It's been in place for maybe five, ten years . In a case of four weeks or more, you interact, have. 14 jurors. normally to sit through the prosecution opening and then you lose two. The two alternates when you get to the evidence proper. And normally that's because if somebody then realises that they know something about the case and they realise it, but it's also if in that in the prosecution, you're going to get a very clear explanation of what the case is actually about.
And at that point, if somebody said I hadn't quite.
And at that point, if somebody said I hadn't quite.
12:05
12:05
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
I can't be true to my oath. I wouldn't be able to be fair in a case like this, because it's to do with the death of a child and I'm recently bereaved or whatever it might be. So that is something that can help perhaps weed out those individual cases where people truly cannot be fair because of a particular personal experience. And there might be some scope for making that more . Available, even
12:06
12:06
12:06
12:06
12:06
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Will select a very large pool to come to that court centre, along with all the other trials that might be starting that day. You'll then get a very large pool in 3040. I've had up to 80 for a really long cases. And then from that you go through and the people who have family commitments, that would mean it wouldn't work properly, or they're self-employed or they have. And you just go through all the the judge goes through.
And that's what Karen was talking about. The notes are read out whether of any relevance. That's why we would know if somebody was raising a religious objection or something like that. And then you get down to your now. 14 with a view . To the 12 that actually hear
And that's what Karen was talking about. The notes are read out whether of any relevance. That's why we would know if somebody was raising a religious objection or something like that. And then you get down to your now. 14 with a view . To the 12 that actually hear
12:07
12:07
12:07
12:07
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Point are the jurors named. So they. That pool I mentioned will be collected in the jury waiting area, the jury lounge, whatever it might be, at the court centre. They will then be selected at random from, say, the. 8030 will be called out up there. They'll come down, there'll be 30 in court. There's a pack of cards are handed to the court clerk , who then shuffles, pulls out the 12, 14 or more as if they.
If they come up and and then say, I've got an issue, I can't sit. Then often there's some pre-selection.
If they come up and and then say, I've got an issue, I can't sit. Then often there's some pre-selection.
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:08
12:08
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
And therefore somehow they were. Well, we don't have, as we know, a sort of, well, a system of. interrogating jurors and then spending a week or two of each trial making a selection of them. So either it is just a random, as Philip was saying. occasionally a name is read out , and actually that name does appear on the papers or is known to someone in the case. And that could be a basis upon which someone says.
12:09
12:09
12:09
12:09
12:09
12:10
12:10
12:10
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
being a journalist for the purposes of that particular case, that wouldn't happen nowadays. No, it wouldn't. I mean, even police officers, as we know, serve on barristers and judges, serve on serve on juries. It would only be if there was a particular issue that you would object to a police officer, because there was a factual, evidential point about police evidence. If there wasn't,
12:10
12:10
12:10
12:10
12:10
12:10
12:10
12:10
12:11
12:11
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
jurors can speak about the material, because this is a Crown Court trial where all that material is in fact, in the public. domain in any event. But I can see that the fear of. trespassing upon that. restriction may prevent. individuals wanting or to sign up for those counselling services. So whilst what we don't want to see, unless we're going to conduct specific research into jury.
deliberations that we have in consequential. breaches of that and and we don't want the counselling services really to be. interrogating the jury deliberation. But I think in order to.
deliberations that we have in consequential. breaches of that and and we don't want the counselling services really to be. interrogating the jury deliberation. But I think in order to.
12:12
12:12
12:12
12:12
12:12
12:12
12:12
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Philip, can I just add one point of detail to that, which is I completely agree with it. The there's the prohibition on discussing what happens in the jury retiring room, which is permanent. You can, after the case is finished, talk about what happened in court, as Kama says, and that you are not allowed to discuss the case whilst you're sitting. And so therefore, for the fine for perhaps the two week.
12:12
12:13
12:13
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
That would be some I can see that would have some difficulty because obviously people can still go to their therapist or whatever if they have one, whilst the case is ongoing. But actually technically they're not allowed to discuss the case they're doing with their therapist whilst it's ongoing. So maybe there's room for some therapeutic. exception on that. aspect as well, really. I think would actually . Having to
12:13
12:13
12:13
12:13
12:13
12:13
12:13
Baroness Berridge
-
-
Baroness Berridge
And I don't want to obviously have evidence that we all find a bit shocking. But when you say they're difficult, what are the kinds of questions of fact that after all that evidence, guilt or innocence is turning on? So the judge gives the direction to the jury because you've got perhaps potentially an 18 year old girl sitting in young woman, sorry, sitting with like older, older men in the what are these kind of. questions of that.
12:14
12:14
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Guilt or innocence? What's the nature of those questions? Well, obviously it does very much depend on on the nature of the case. But in a in a rape case, quite often it will be about whether or not she is telling the truth, whether she was consenting or not, whether the defendant had a reasonable belief in consent. And so all of those. issues do bring up.
12:14
12:14
12:15
12:15
12:15
12:15
12:15
12:15
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
The dynamics between the defendant and the victim. Were they genuinely acting in self-defence? Did those all those facts occur? It's difficult to perhaps narrow them down more than that in terms of the issues. But but yes, we do of course, become aware through perhaps how long it's taking for verdicts to reach. And we read an awful lot into the sort of the body language of them coming back into their before their.
12:15
12:15
12:15
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:16
12:17
12:17
12:17
12:17
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
supportive of the jury system. I know that Canada has passed the bill, I think, to allow the. therapeutic exception that was mentioned. I also know that there's what's now a standardized juror notice that is. provided to all jurors, which the is freely available to look at, which has been adopted in other. jurisdictions as well. So I know that Northern Ireland and Scotland have done it, and I think Canada as well.
But that provides the sort of basic level reference to the Samaritans, the . NHS,
But that provides the sort of basic level reference to the Samaritans, the . NHS,
12:18
12:18
12:18
12:18
12:18
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
What should we know about how that is handled? I've been deeply impressed by the way the criminal justice system has tried to. accommodate significant. disabilities and allow them to have a meaningful jury service, even when it has been of considerable cost, in fact, and potential delay to the trial process. There are. limitations to that. If it is a video that perhaps you need to be able to look at particular aspects of that, that then there will be an.
investigation and discussion about whether, for example, a blind juror is. appropriate in that case. But quite often we have found that there are. mechanisms by which we can reduce the evidence in different ways. I was aware of a trial recently of a fully deaf juror who was able to do full jury service through the use of sign language and more than one in the courtroom. So the court does, in my.
investigation and discussion about whether, for example, a blind juror is. appropriate in that case. But quite often we have found that there are. mechanisms by which we can reduce the evidence in different ways. I was aware of a trial recently of a fully deaf juror who was able to do full jury service through the use of sign language and more than one in the courtroom. So the court does, in my.
12:19
12:19
12:19
12:19
12:19
12:19
12:19
12:20
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
different way to inform the judge's decision? Yes, that's exactly right. It's held the. prosecution are presenting this case. The burden is on them to work out how they reduce the evidence in a way that is. understandable by by the jury. And of course, if we wouldn't have advance notice of a particular jurors need, it may be that we cannot. accommodate doing that for that particular trial, but it would be.
unlikely that that would mean that they couldn't do their jury service at all, just that that one particular . Trial
unlikely that that would mean that they couldn't do their jury service at all, just that that one particular . Trial
12:20
12:20
12:20
12:20
12:21
12:21
12:21
12:21
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Established for that? Yes. That would be the sort of challenge for cause that I was talking about earlier. And in the same way, if somebody has difficulty reading and the case revolves around a great deal of written evidence, you might say, this is just not the sort of case that this juror is going to be able to properly participate. And there's no way around it, I'm afraid. So you would say in those.
12:21
12:21
12:22
12:22
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
That's very helpful. Thank you for adding that additional point. I just also wanted to add that those were one of the things that we would probably find out about before that juror was selected. What we wouldn't want to do is have them. selected and then have a rather. embarrassing focus on their disability. So if we were aware there was a blind, deaf juror, a judge is likely to say we are they could be part of the pool before that happens.
Is this a case that would be suitable? Can we
Is this a case that would be suitable? Can we
12:22
12:22
12:22
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
-
-
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
happened a step earlier. Thank you. Very helpful. Baroness Hughes. Thank you chair. Thinking specifically now about support for juries. And you've mentioned 1 or 2 areas, I think, where you feel there could be. improvements made. We'd like to ask you both whether there are. particular issues you think we would be wise to include as. recommendations from this committee in that regard? We've heard evidence from other people.
And just to give you, you know, some prompts in terms of other issues that have been raised with us, whether better pre-trial.
And just to give you, you know, some prompts in terms of other issues that have been raised with us, whether better pre-trial.
12:23
12:23
12:23
12:23
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
-
-
Baroness Hughes of Stretford
Issues about your. expenses and the fact that they have to pay those up front. And they're not terribly generous, we're told, whether there's an argument for compulsory training for judiciary and court staff around some of these issues. In terms of the impact on jurors. We've also heard, and just picking up your point about disability access, but that generally in some courts, the standard of. accommodation and comfort.
12:23
12:23
12:23
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
Justice in terms of the. recommendations we might make to them? And what can I. I'll start with two, if I may, and pick up on that last point. Jury lounges, retiring rooms used to be staffed a long time ago, and that went. And now, and it's been mentioned once already the role of the court usher, often one of the worst paid people within the criminal justice system process, is absolutely key.
And the continuity of usher with a jury, because they become their friends and they talk to them and they pick up on issues and they talk about their home lives , and if they're having trouble getting to court, or if their employer is causing problems with them, and they can feed that back to the judge and things can be nipped in the bud is really important. And so the resources that can be put in to. continuity of usher, quality of usher training of ushers is in the current circumstances, I think something that would actually be.
rewards because it only takes one case of 4 or 5 months to fall apart because the jurors are not being properly. supported for it to pay for itself, really, because that is a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds at least. And . Then
And the continuity of usher with a jury, because they become their friends and they talk to them and they pick up on issues and they talk about their home lives , and if they're having trouble getting to court, or if their employer is causing problems with them, and they can feed that back to the judge and things can be nipped in the bud is really important. And so the resources that can be put in to. continuity of usher, quality of usher training of ushers is in the current circumstances, I think something that would actually be.
rewards because it only takes one case of 4 or 5 months to fall apart because the jurors are not being properly. supported for it to pay for itself, really, because that is a cost of hundreds of thousands of pounds at least. And . Then
12:25
12:25
Speaker 1
-
Speaker 1
the pilot that was operated had very little take up. Yes. But A that means it probably wouldn't be very expensive to make it permanent if there is very little take up. And also, I think going back to my point about. reassuring jurors as they start off, that there is going to be something available for you if you need it, you probably won't. But if you do, it's here.
12:25
12:25
12:25
12:25
12:25
12:26
12:26
12:26
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Really, about leaving, trying to leave material mentally in the courtroom, even as little as sort of keeping hydrated through the day, and easy steps to limit the traumatic impact that could be included as part of the initial training for the jury. Relatively simply, I think this I have to say, I slightly wince at the end of a trial when the jury have had to endure perhaps months of detailed, horrific.
12:26
12:26
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
And a judge says, you could call the. Samaritans that the generic nature of that just. feels as though there is limited care for people who have given a lot to, to, to the system. So I would welcome a referral to a specialist service. even if it's taken up in a limited way. The fact that the state provides that for people who've been taken from their ordinary lives and given so much, is a symbol of proper recognition.
But I think what you said is very interesting because you cannot divorce the jury. experience from the court estate. And as much as they don't seem to be wholly connected, they are, you know, to make a juror feel.
But I think what you said is very interesting because you cannot divorce the jury. experience from the court estate. And as much as they don't seem to be wholly connected, they are, you know, to make a juror feel.
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:27
12:27
Speaker 2
-
Speaker 2
Limited bathroom facilities. We have had a crumbling court estate and we have at the Criminal Bar Association been shouting about this for a long time. It's one thing as an advocate to have no canteen, limited bathrooms, no access to warm drinks. But when we are enforcing this upon jurors, that is the very least we can do is . Give them
12:28
12:28
12:28
12:28
Lord Foster of Bath
-
-
Lord Foster of Bath
Time does not permit, but it's been. incredibly helpful. As I often say, at the end of these sessions, I'm sure you can think of things you wish you'd said and you haven't. And that we need to know and we clearly don't. So if that is the case, please don't hesitate to write to us. But I would ask that you do it as quickly as possible because our time for getting this report finished is a bit tight, so please do that if there's anything you want to raise with us, and we may even come to you with some further questions.
But on behalf of the entire committee, thank you both very much. It's been very instructive. Session. Thank you very much indeed. Order, order!
But on behalf of the entire committee, thank you both very much. It's been very instructive. Session. Thank you very much indeed. Order, order!
12:29
12:29