Done Over By Do-Overs? - 17/04/16

In this week's show, we take a look at what happens when juries cannot reach a verdict. Take a listen right here. 

Many people, especially defendants, are quite horrified when they find out that the prosecution can decide whether it wants to have not just a second attempt but, sometimes, a third attempt!

In this episode, we consider what the "sometimes" above actually means. 

Let us know if you like the new "Bites" format (shorter and with less wine and cake) or if you are longing for a return to our longer format. If you are a law student, we'd be really grateful if you would spread the news of our show's return around your law school friends. Also, get in touch. We'd love to hear from you.

PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.  If you use iTunes, please click here and it'll take just seconds!

S13E03 - Expert Evidence, Unreliable Evidence and Fresh Evidence

Listen to this week's show right here.

We have talked about expert witnesses many times over the past 12 series but we have seldom explored exactly what an "expert witness" is, what they do, to whom they are accountable, how they are regulated and how they come to be involved in cases.  

This week, we fix that by catching-up with Glen Siddall of Aequitas Forensics, Manchester.  Glen is an expert in digital forensics and he is instructed by "both sides" in criminal proceedings.  We ask him about his work and about recent changes in the world of the expert witness and about hacking Richard Bacon's iPhone.

We also talk to Glen about the recent BBC documentary, Panorama - Justice For Sale?  Did the programme accurately reflect his experience of being an expert and does he agree with the conclusions of the journalist and of Timothy Dutton QC, former Chair of the Bar about future regulation?

In the news this week, fresh evidence appeals.  We record on the day after a man walks free after being wrongly-convicted of raping his wife multiple times.  Fresh evidence emerged that the complainant (who still cannot be named) had lied about the rape, had talked about lying in advance of the trial and seemingly boasted about lying after the event.  This is the nightmare scenario that, whilst certainly rare, we would prefer to think never happens.  He had been sentenced to 9 years for each count but this was increased to 13 years by the Court of Appeal, following an Attorney-General's Reference.

With that and other matters in our minds, we look at what the Court of Appeal has recently said about fresh evidence and we'll consider whether its approach is consistent.

A little bit of Freedom of Information too, this week.  We heard that the CPS was using unpaid students to prepare cases in one of its offices.  We asked if this could possibly be true.  They answered our FOI request.  Is the answer surprising or not?


PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.  If you use iTunes, please click here and it'll take just seconds! Feeding BritCaster.com

S13E02 - Historic Sexual Offences

Have a listen to this week's show right here.

In the light of the recent verdicts and sentence in Rolph Harris' case, Kirstin goes through the Sexual Offences Act 1956, looking at what offences are contained in it and how amendments have affected the law.
Given that we are on the subject of how the law changes over the years and that retrospective legislation is dangerous territory, we thought it would be worthwhile to take a peek at the decision of the High Court in Reilly (No.2) as the Government gets a bloody nose for playing dirty with JSA claimants.

Both hefty legal matters this week so next week we will hopefully be being chatty on the subject of experts and looking at our postbag from the CPS, MoJ and Home Office.  Doesn't look like fan mail....

Also, PLEASE RATE/REVIEW US: wherever you subscribe, please take two seconds as we start this series, to give us some stars and a few kind words.  We'd be e'er so obliged.  It helps us get up the search rankings, ya see.

S11E02 - Filth, Filthy Behaviour and Filthy Lucre

You can listen to show by clicking right here but, of course, we'd prefer that you subscribed on iTunes or via Google Play Store or via any good podcatcher app on your phone/tablet.  Ben from Northpod Law particularly recommends this one for Android and iOS.

On this week's show, we take you through the details of the Sexual Offences Guidelines on sentencing.  We consider not only the mechanics of the guidelines for rape and assault by penetration but also the reasoning behind some of the changes.  The link to the guidelines is below.

Jonathan takes a look at the case that made the CPS cringe this week.  Did cost considerations really lead to the CPS binning at trial?  The full text is below.

The CBA meet with Grayling and it does not look good.

Andrew Neil meets with Grayling and makes him look a fool.  Turns out ministerial responsibility is a principle no longer appreciated by the Lord Chancellor.  Thanks to the BBC for the clip.

And a whole pile of other news stories that caught our eye but for which we had no time left.  Lots to get through in the links below.

Links

Sexual Offences Guidelines: http://sentencingcouncil.judiciary.gov.uk/docs/web_SexualOffencesAct_2003.pdf

CPS bin a trial when things get costly: http://www.crimeline.info/case/r-v-renate-andrews-and-others  and http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/01/14/cps-criticised-for-wilful-calculated-and-prolonged-disobedience-in-trial/

In it to win it (and we are) says Nigel Lithman QC: http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=9e935b7a6c6c561621aaf46ab&id=a4a2f8c45e&e=cded007a3d

AND STOP PRESS: 16th January at 1730 hours: http://us7.campaign-archive1.com/?u=9e935b7a6c6c561621aaf46ab&id=f3ecdaebd2&e=366745fc1e

Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics:

1. Grayling admits that the barristers’ earnings figures published out of nowhere last week were not an accurate reflection of the actual earnings but says that, even though his department published the stats, he could not be responsible for it.  This was during interview on Sunday Politics with Andrew Neil.

2. Law Society says that the drop in crime, year on year, will save £80m in legal aid by 2019 so no cuts are needed.

http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/jan/13/declining-crime-save-80m-a-year-in-legal-aid

But it’s a bit undermined by its own preamble: Top of page 6

'The MoJ and LAA have been extremely helpful in supporting this work. However the LAA’s forecasting model draws on a number of datasets and assumptions that are not publically available. Without first-hand access to the LAA model or the confidential datasets, it has not been possible fully to recreate the LAA’s forecast for future years. The criminal Legal Aid expenditure forecast generated  by our model cannot therefore be directly compared to the LAA’s figures in any given year.'

and the MoJ told the Gazette:

‘This forecast is far less accurate than our own. Last year our forecast was correct to within 1%, whereas if we had used Oxford Economics analysis, we would have repeatedly overspent our legal aid litigation budget in the past few years.’ - interesting based upon Grayling’s view of the Ministry’s ability with figures...

3. A few days later, tory-rag the Daily Mail trumpets that that MoJ’s crime figures are wrong and that crime is not falling at all - therefore the Law Society’s argument must be wrong too.  Will May and the police get thrown on to the sacrificial bonfire by Grayling to continue his hate campaign against legal aid lawyers?  

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540003/Its-official-Crime-numbers-NOT-trusted-statistics-watchdog-strips-police-data-seal-approval.html

4. 140 fewer courts but still the same costs for security?  Law Soc Gaz gets all FOI on the MoJ and reveals some odd answers:

http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/law/security-spending-unchanged-as-courts-close/5039347.article

5. What cost injustice?  This is devastating to the CPS.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/wasted_costs_orders?unfold=1#incoming-470067

JD: A summary of the highly pertinent info (yes, that’s 1.2 million):

Crown Prosecution Service
Mar03	418,961
Mar04	160,606
Mar05	146,998
Mar06	153,878
Mar07	403,358
Mar08	751,538
Mar09	652,766
Mar10	907,061
Mar11	1,547,874
Mar12	384,682
Mar13	1,202,515

Some interesting stats on interpreters at court.  

https://www.facebook.com/download/435950943174804/Ineffective%20trials%20statistics%20INTERPRETERS.pdf

vs.

http://www.crimeline.info/uploads/docs/capita2014.pdf

In response to our request for comment from Geoffrey Buckingham

Chairman, APCI, he said “you may like to see the APCI FB page (link below) which has a comment;

"MoJ COURT INTERPRETING STATISTICS

The MoJ has published statistics for the performance of the Framework Agreement. They have done their best to dress it up, but you know that old saying about lipstick and bulldogs? Well they've gone a step further and put a dress and hat on it."

There is rather more considered comment and analysis to come on their website: http://www.apciinterpreters.org.uk/

Family courts clogged

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/courts-becoming-clogged-as-legal-aid-cuts-affect-separating-couples-seeking-mediation-9057133.html

But Law Society thinks that it has spotted a problem.  Fee-charging McKenzie friends trying to make money by plugging the gap left by legal aid cuts (especially in family law): http://www.lawsociety.org.uk/news/stories/case-studies-on-fee-charging-mckenzie-friends/

Cops want to stop locking kids up in Greater Manchester

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jan/13/detention-children-overnight-police-cells-breach-law

On the subject of locking up kids, this is often the subject of coroners’ Prevention of Future Deaths reports (or “Rule 43 reports” as they used to be known).  These have just started to be made available online.  Good news for transparency and for research.

http://www.judiciary.gov.uk/about-the-judiciary/office-chief-coroner/pfd-reports/index

S10E01 - It's Not Fair!

Episode one of series 10, eh?

Well life's not fair but at least you can listen here and know that your glass half empty view of the world is actually fully justifiable.

First up on the it's not fair index is having to spend forever behind bars because you can't afford to pay the ever increasing interest payments of the loan shark government.  Ben looks at unforeseen consequences of POCA legislation as discussed in the case of R v Gibson.

Then Kirstin looks at the guidelines for prosecutors of child sex abuse cases, holding her head in her hands for the most part that the prosecution need guidelines to tell them to do what they should already be doing. (Although there are some creditable bits too).

Jonathan joins us to hold his head in his hands about IPNAs and CBOs - You'll just have to listen if you don't know what these are but be afraid.

We recognise there are new offences of subletting a council house - more next week perhaps.

And finally, we salute His Honour Justice Holman and Bar Council Chairman Maura McGowan for telling it like it is.  You can read along with us here and here.