Maltin PR hosts Spotlight on Jury Trials panel debate

Maltin PR last night hosted its first Spotlight event, bringing together senior figures from across the criminal justice system for a wide-ranging and robust debate on the future of jury trials set against the unprecedented crisis in the criminal justice system that has led to an 80,000 backlog of cases in the crown court, with cases now being listed for trial in 2029.

The panel comprised:

• Sir Brian Leveson, formerly Lord Justice of Appeal, Head of Criminal Justice and President of the Queen’s Bench Division.
• Sir Max Hill KC, formerly Director of Public Prosecutions, now Senior Counsel and Policy Advisor at King & Spalding.
• Kirsty Brimelow KC, Chair of the Bar and former Chair of the Criminal Bar Association and the Bar Human Rights Committee.
• Claire Waxman OBE, Victims’ Commissioner for England and Wales.

The debate, which was held at the Ashworth Centre in Lincoln’s Inn, was moderated by Maltin PR senior partner Clive Coleman, himself a former criminal barrister and BBC Legal Correspondent.

Held under Chatham House rules, the discussion followed the publication of Part 1 of the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts, chaired by Sir Brian Leveson. Its raft of recommendations included the creation of a new Crown Court bench division where the vast majority of ‘either way’ offences, would be tried by a judge sitting with two magistrates, if the likely sentence was 3 years or less. That was the backdrop to the subsequent announcement by the Justice Secretary and Lord Chancellor David Lammy of Swift Courts where cases with a likely sentence of three years or less would be heard by a Judge alone.
Sir Brian’s other recommendations included:

• ⁠increasing out of court disposals for more minor offences
• removing the right to elect jury trial for less serious offences
• ⁠removing the right of automatic appeal from the magistrates’ court to the crown court,
• greater use of advance sentence indications, known as Goodyear indications, at an earlier stage and increasing maximum sentence reduction for a plea to 40%,
• ⁠allowing defendants in the Crown Court to elect trial by judge alone
• judge only trials to be directed in cases of complex fraud or exceptionally long and complex cases

The panel examined the scale of the current backlog and the principal causes behind it. These included chronic long-term underfunding, the increasing complexity of evidence in criminal trials, the shortages of judges and advocates, time wasted because prisoners were frequently not produced at court, and the cumulative impact of the pandemic and industrial action by members of the Criminal Bar.

The debate explored proposals to restrict the use of jury trials in certain cases, alongside broader questions about efficiency, fairness, public confidence, and racial bias in the system. The constitutional significance of jury trial, the experience of victims and witnesses, and the practical realities of what is possible in delivering timely justice, were all considered in depth. At times sharply different perspectives were aired on whether the proposed reforms would alleviate pressure on the system or lead to unintended harm.

The panel discussion was followed by a thirty-minute question-and-answer session, with contributions from an audience of senior solicitors, KCs from the Criminal Bar Association, academics, and journalists.

Maltin PR would like to thank the panellists and all those who attended for contributing to a thoughtful and informed debate on what is the most significant crisis ever faced by our criminal justice system.