« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
IMPROVING PRACTICE
CHAPTER 15 ARRANGING THE ATTENDANCE OF ACCUSED, WITNESSES AND JURORS
15.1 In spite of the peremptory terms of the notice by the Lord Justice General (Rodger) that the Court would sit at 10am 221, that frequently does not happen. The failure to start on time gives an impression of a casual attitude to the organisation of business and, if allowed to continue, will eventually tend to undermine public confidence in the capacity of those involved in the criminal justice system to organise the conduct of its business. It does seem strange that major public events such as football matches and concerts generally start on time, with all the main participants present well in advance of that time to ensure that it does. In contrast to that, the arrangements for the attendance of the personnel necessary to enable the High Court to sit do not consistently achieve that object.
15.2 It has to be recognised that there are two main differences between attendance at public entertainment and attendance at court. The football match or concert is at a fixed place on a certain time and date, whereas the venue, time and date of a High Court trial may change at short notice and on a number of occasions. I have tried to address that difference in the proposals which I have already made in this report. The other major difference is that those attending public entertainment want to be there, whereas those required at the High Court may be reluctant to attend.
15.3 I turn now to address the arrangements for attendance at court of three groups who have to be assembled to enable a trial to proceed - accused, witnesses and jurors.
Attendance of Accused in Custody
15.4 Arranging the attendance of an accused from custody to court should, on the face of it, present no problems. It is, however, a very resource-intensive exercise. Large numbers of prisoners require to be taken to courts all over Scotland every day. Their attendance is often for a formal appearance. There are presently few situations for which there is specific provision that the hearing, however brief and formal, may take place in the absence of the accused, even where he is content that that should be the case.
Eliminating Unnecessary Attendance
15.5 The Scottish Court Service have been considering the potential for the use of television equipment to link courts with prisons. The prisoner can communicate with his representative over the link, and then appear in court over the link. A pilot scheme is planned for the Sheriff Court in Glasgow. There is no reason why its use should be confined to Sheriff Court proceedings. It is not suggested that such a link should be used for trial proceedings. It could be used where it is clear that the appearance in court would be a formality. It could be used in preliminary diet proceedings, where a prisoner has to travel a long distance, and the court is satisfied that his personal attendance would not materially assist the progress of the case.
15.6 Quite apart from the benefits that might stem from the use of this technology, there are other steps which might be taken to ensure that prisoners are brought to court only when there are to be meaningful proceedings. It is often necessary for cases to be adjourned following conviction and before sentence for reports to be prepared and inquiries to be made 222. It is generally appropriate that such cases should remain with the judge who presided at the time of conviction. The judge will normally adjourn the case to a fixed place and date. On the due date he may be sitting elsewhere, because his court commitments have changed at short notice. The case then calls on the appointed date at the appointed place, with accused, counsel and solicitor present, and is further adjourned as a pure formality by another judge. Where the accused is in custody, it should be possible to take him to the court where the judge is presiding. At the moment that cannot be done without the case calling in court and being further adjourned. The Lord Justice General has drafted subordinate legislation, which the court has power to make, an Act of Adjournal, authorising the venue of the adjourned diet to be changed by administrative order of the court, without the case calling in court. That would be done a minimum of forty-eight hours before the appointed diet. An accused would then be brought to the location where the judge was sitting. That location would be intimated to an accused on bail not less than thirty-six hours beforehand. Any interested member of the public would be able to find out where sentence would be imposed by contacting Justiciary Office. If it would not be reasonable to expect those interested to travel to that location, it should be possible to further adjourn the case. That could be done administratively, if the accused consented.
Adjourning for Sentence
15.7 Another factor, which can give rise to a formal appearance simply for further adjournment of the case, is the rule that the court cannot remand a convicted accused in custody, pending the preparation of reports for sentence, for more than three weeks at a time 223. When the case is adjourned, the judge may know that he will not be available to deal with it at the appointed adjourned diet. That can occur in cases where it is inevitable that a lengthy custodial sentence will be imposed. This provision is too inflexible. Where an accused is on bail after conviction, the court can adjourn the case routinely for four weeks and for up to eight weeks on cause shown 224. The same power should be available in respect of accused in custody.
15.8 When a judge adjourns the diet for sentence for the purpose of obtaining background reports, the case is often adjourned to Edinburgh because that is where the judge is scheduled, or most likely, to be sitting on the date to which it is adjourned. In Edinburgh it is more likely that he will be sitting in a civil case or in an appeal court than on first instance criminal business. Since first instance criminal cases take priority, hearing the adjourned diet for sentence may delay other business. It is not uncommon for a number of judges to have adjourned cases calling before them on one day. That can put a considerable strain on the resources of the Crown, and further delay may occur because one advocate depute has to deal with more than one court. It also places a strain on the resources of the police, who provide two officers as escorts in each court. There has been an enormous increase in the volume of pre-trial and post-trial incidental business coming before the Court in Edinburgh. The total number of pieces of such business has increased from 640 in 1996 to 2,245 in 2001 225. Each case required the attendance of two officers as dock escorts. Around 50% of these items of business were adjourned diets for sentence 226. Were judges to sit for longer continuous periods in one criminal court or on criminal business generally, that would reduce the incidence of adjourned diets in Edinburgh. Should adjourning a diet for sentence to Edinburgh be unavoidable, then it would greatly reduce the potential for delay and disruption of other court business if the case called in Edinburgh on a Monday, when the pressure of business in court is less than on other days.
Transport Arrangements
15.9 The actual arrangements for transporting prisoners to court vary from region to region. Transport handled by the police in one region might be handled by the Prison Service in another. There is no national agreement about the time at which prisoners should be brought to court or about the arrangements for bringing them to court. Two years ago a local agreement was made that prisoners in custody would arrive at the High Court in Glasgow before 9.15am. This is to ensure that counsel and solicitors have time to consult with their clients prior to the court sitting at 10.00am. The agreement has worked well in practice. However, it is not followed at all High Court locations.
15.10 There have been occasions on which prisoners have been brought long distances on the morning of their court appearance, and have arrived late. Travelling long distances is, in any event, undesirable, prior to an important court attendance. It is possible for prisoners to be accommodated in a prison nearer the court prior to their appearance.
15.11 The Scottish Executive is presently considering the contractual provisions which should apply on the transfer of the responsibility for the movement of prisoners to and from court and for their security at court to an outside agency. The time is right for national arrangements to be put in place. These should include ensuring that prisoners are at court a minimum of forty-five minutes before the court is due to sit. In addition, there should be an agreement about the maximum distance a prisoner might be brought on the morning of his appearance, to ensure that he is fit to concentrate on the proceedings.
15.12 I observe in passing that attention should be paid in these negotiations to the standard of dress and behaviour in court of the staff engaged on prisoner escort duties. When I visited courts in England in the course of the Review, I found that the informal dress of some of the prisoner escort staff, and the fairly casual attitude which they adopted in court, were not in keeping with the dignity of the courtroom.
Attendance of Accused on Bail
15.13 The research done for the Review shows that a higher percentage of accused are now on bail than was the case five years ago 227. That increases the potential for witnesses, victims and relatives of victims to encounter the accused as they make their way to and from the court building. There is no requirement upon an accused on bail to attend earlier than the time at which the hearing of his case should start.
15.14 Since it is just as likely that those representing accused on bail, and indeed those simply ordained to appear, will require to consult with them as it is in the case of an accused in custody, there should be formal arrangements for their attendance. They should be required to be in the court building no later than forty-five minutes before the case is scheduled to start, and should attend at a particular room assigned for that purpose. There would thus be certainty about where their representatives could contact them. If an accused fails to attend for trial, that is presently only clear at 10.00am. Were he to fail to attend by 9.15am, inquiries could be made with the prospect of there being some explanation for the court at 10.00am.
15.15 Requiring the accused to attend and remain in a particular room would reduce the chances that they might encounter witnesses and victims. Victims and relatives of deceased victims identified unexpected encounters with the accused within the court building, and the very possibility of encountering the accused, as sources of further anxiety. While the prospect of contact cannot be eliminated, it can be significantly reduced.
15.16 Once a trial has started, it is open to the Crown to oppose the continued release of the accused on bail. The Crown exercise a wise discretion in their approach to this issue, and there are few occasions on which the continuation of bail at the time of the trial is abused by accused. I see no reason for suggesting a change to the present arrangements. On the other hand, I do consider that the more formal arrangements for the attendance of the accused should continue throughout his trial, and that similar arrangements should apply at the end of each day. He should return from the dock to the room assigned for forty-five minutes, to ensure that those representing him have the opportunity to consult with him, and to allow others involved in the trial to leave before him.
15.17 These arrangements could be incorporated into standard conditions in bail orders in solemn proceedings 228.
Witnesses
15.18 The issues relating to the arrangements for the attendance of witnesses fall into two categories - the practical arrangements for ensuring their attendance and cancelling or countermanding their attendance when circumstances change, and separately, adapting the arrangements to the situation where accused will not be indicted to a trial diet but to a preliminary diet.
The Current Arrangements for Citing Witnesses
15.19 While the arrangements vary from region to region, there are certain common features. Crown witnesses are cited after the indictment is served, in general two to three weeks before the sitting of the Court. Citations for police witnesses are sent by the procurator fiscal to divisional police offices, which are then responsible for alerting the officers of their divisions to their court commitments. Other professional witnesses, such as forensic scientists and pathologists, are often cited in a similar way.
15.20 The procurator fiscal also sends the citations for civilian witnesses to the police. In some areas, including Edinburgh and Glasgow, the police employ civilian process servers to deliver the citations. In Edinburgh the civilian employees work a flexible shift system, and can serve citations outwith normal working hours. In Glasgow the citation of witnesses outwith normal working hours has to be dealt with by police officers, who have many other duties which may take priority. Information that a witness has not been traced and that the citation has not been served should be relayed to the procurator fiscal. Executions of successful citations should be returned to the procurator fiscal.
15.21 Witnesses can be difficult to trace. Some may work odd hours. Some may live between addresses. Others may be conscious of the fact that they are to be cited and may wish to avoid citation. Some may be on holiday. Those serving the citations may try to serve them a number of times with mixed success. The procurator fiscal may learn nothing of the difficulties experienced by the police in citing a witness until the trial is due to start. The executions of the successful citations are often not returned by the date of the trial. The resultant uncertainty about the attendance of witnesses may lead to the trial being adjourned. Communication is a major problem in relation to the citation of witnesses.
Citation of witnesses in future
15.22 Efficient arrangements for the attendance of witnesses, and for conveying to those responsible for the conduct of business relevant information about the availability of witnesses, are fundamental to the proper organisation of the criminal justice system. The current problems seem to be largely the result of the inevitable need for the police to prioritise business and the absence of co-ordinated management of the citation process. In some police offices priority is given to citations according to the date of the court; that might mean that District Court citations are given priority over High Court citations. Citation seems to work best where staff are dedicated to the task.
15.23 Under the Quality and Practice Control Unit proposals 229, citation will presumably be the responsibility of Crown Office staff who will by then have assumed responsibility for the case. Instruction for citation would thus be issued from only two offices. This is an ideal time to introduce a uniform system. What the system should be, and who should operate it, are questions to which urgent consideration should be given. The Crown Office, in association with the Association of Chief Police Officers (Scotland), should establish a working party to consider these questions. I have considered two possibilities.
15.24 Management of the citation process would be greatly improved if there existed a body with the sole responsibility of arranging the attendance of witnesses at court. Such a body would be answerable directly to the Crown, or might even be a branch of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. They could develop systems which could be applied throughout the country. I would expect them to cite police officers and forensic scientists by sending citations to the relevant divisional police office or to police headquarters. They would deal directly with other professional witnesses such as pathologists. Most importantly they would trace and cite civilian witnesses, report difficulties to the Procurator Fiscal, and return citations timeously to the Procurator Fiscal. They should work shifts to ensure that they have the capacity to try to cite witnesses at all times of the day and night. They should have access to all available records that will assist them to locate witnesses. The statutory specification of those who may serve citations on witnesses at present includes "any person authorised by the Lord Advocate" 230.
15.25 Such a body could be responsible for the citation of witnesses to courts other than the High Court. That is a matter on which I cannot comment. In lower courts the systems employed are different and postal citation is used 231. Should postal citation be introduced into the High Court, then it is vital that there should be a body such as this to monitor returned citations and ensure that personal citation is effected as soon as possible thereafter.
15.26 On the other hand, there are cases in which ensuring the attendance of witnesses at court is not a simple mechanical exercise but is a sensitive issue. The police may devote substantial time to liaising with frightened and anxious witnesses. It was suggested that removing responsibility for citation of such witnesses from the police may undermine their work and reduce, rather than increase, the prospects of securing the attendance of the witnesses at court. Modern police forces also have available to them information and intelligence, which helps them to trace elusive people, and which may not be available to another body undertaking responsibility for citation. It may be that the benefits of better management of the citation process and the information and intelligence available to the police can be harnessed by improving the way in which the police undertake citation. Each police force could appoint staff with responsibility for liaising with the Crown and for co-ordinating the exercise of citing the witnesses and reporting the results. It was also pointed out that the police are particularly well placed to cite witnesses in remote parts of the country. It is suggested that, for these reasons, the police should continue to have responsibility for citing witnesses.
15.27 These do not appear to me to be compelling reasons. The existence of such a body, with responsibility for delivering the citations, should not interfere with the work that the police have done to liaise with witnesses to ensure their attendance at court. Their duties would be confined to formally citing them for that attendance. The relevant information and intelligence held by the police could be shared with such a body. They would inevitably have to call upon the assistance of the police, not only to trace witnesses, but also to support them if they anticipate trouble. The witness citation body may enter into an agreement with the police for the citation of witnesses in remote areas.
15.28 Like the Thomson Committee 232, who also recommended a witness citation service under the control of the Procurator Fiscal, I consider that citation of witnesses is not an appropriate duty for the police, and that police manpower, training, qualifications and experience can be deployed in more productive ways in the fight against crime. However, because the matter is so complex, and because it has not been possible to investigate it in the detail that would be necessary to make a firm recommendation, I stop short of recommending the formation of such a body, and confine my recommendation to the immediate establishment of a working party with the remit to urgently report on a national system for the citation of witnesses and the appropriate body to undertake the task.
Reluctant Witnesses
15.29 It should be standard practice nowadays for the police officer or procurator fiscal interviewing a witness to ascertain the witness's home address, any address at which he lives for part of the week, the address of his place of work, and all relevant land-line and mobile telephone numbers. All of that information should be passed, with the citation instructions, to the witness citation body.
15.30 The police and Crown should give clear instructions to all staff who interview witnesses, that they should comment at the end of the statement or precognition whenever they consider that there is a real possibility that the witness will try to avoid attendance at court. The body responsible for citing witnesses would then be forewarned. The procurator fiscal should then decide whether special arrangements should be made, either on the day before or the day of the trial, to ensure the witness's attendance.
Witness Intending to Abscond
15.31 Where the procurator fiscal has a reasonable basis for asserting that a witness is endeavouring to avoid citation or intends not to attend court to give evidence, he may petition the court for a warrant to apprehend the witness 233. These proceedings are traditionally taken in the Sheriff Court. When the witness is apprehended he should be brought before the sheriff, when he may be remanded in custody, or released on finding security for his attendance.
15.32 Where a witness fails to appear at the trial diet in answer to a citation, the prosecutor may invite the court to grant a warrant for his apprehension and detention until the trial takes place.
15.33 In both situations, the witness who thereafter seeks release applies by petition to the Nobile Officium of the court. His application is heard by three senior judges. This is over-elaborate procedure for the issue involved. The options for the court are limited. Since the trial may not be imminent, the witness may be released on undertaking to attend or on finding security for his attendance. The only alternative is to keep him in custody.
15.34 In summary cases there is statutory provision for a warrant to be granted where a witness is unlikely to appear or fails to appear, and for the witness to be brought before a justice when apprehended 234.
15.35 The circumstances in which a warrant to apprehend a witness may be granted in solemn cases should be regulated by statute, as it is in summary proceedings. Both the sheriff and a judge of the High Court should have power to grant the warrant. The warrant should provide for the witness to be apprehended and brought forthwith before the High Court. That Court should then have power to decide whether to remand the witness in custody until the case is disposed of or make other arrangements to secure his attendance, including requiring security for his attendance, or imposing bail conditions.
15.36 Consideration should also be given to providing the court with the additional option of imposing a restriction of liberty order until the trial, so that the witness would be electronically tagged and his movements monitored. This would avoid detaining in custody those witnesses, often teenagers, whose main motivation for avoiding their obligations is fear, but, in view of the availability of other options such as bail, would be restricted to exceptional cases.
Countermanding Witnesses
15.37 In view of the constant rearrangement of business during sittings, and the number of occasions on which cases are adjourned, countermanding the attendance of witnesses and making other arrangements for their attendance has become a major task. It is often a rushed job, done by a procurator fiscal who has a hundred and one other things to do. Lists of witnesses, whose attendance has to be cancelled or rearranged, are sent to the police office from which the case initially emanated. The route taken from the Crown Office to the relevant police office varies from court to court. The list is often hastily compiled and has very basic information about the witnesses. It may even be difficult for the police to identify the police officers involved, where only a surname is given. There are often breakdowns in communication. A disturbing number of police officers attend the High Court on days in respect of which notice should have been given to them not to attend 235. This may occur because the information is sent at short notice and does not reach the officer on account of his shift pattern.
15.38 Police forces should have systems in place to relay information about citation and the countermanding of citation to officers both on and off duty. One force already has a system for electronic communication of similar information to officers, which could possibly be used as a model. If a dedicated witness citation body is established, it should have responsibility for the countermanding of witnesses, and should work with the police to establish procedures for ensuring that information is relayed to the relevant officers as quickly as possible.
Attendance of Witnesses on First and Subsequent Days of a Trial
15.39 Most trials last a number of days. It is common for most of the civilian witnesses to be brought to court on the first day. That is to ensure that no essential witness is not available. It is then the responsibility of the Crown to ensure that these witnesses are advised when to return to court.
15.40 There should be less need to carry out a last-minute check on the availability of witnesses in any of the public services and professional services, all of whom one would expect to notify the court of any development affecting their ability to attend. However, at present the Crown take responsibility for maintaining contact with these witnesses, to advise them when they should attend and of any change in the arrangements for their attendance. That is a time-consuming daily exercise. It is also unnecessary. For a number of years now, jurors, who are not balloted on to a jury on the first date of their attendance at a sitting of the court, have been required to telephone an answering service each evening to be given instructions for their further attendance at the sitting. The same arrangements should be put in place for witnesses in the public service, who will in the main be police officers. Once the trial has started, the responsibility should be on their shoulders to check each evening whether they are required the following day.
Information about Witness Availability at Preliminary Diet
15.41 The Crown consider that one possible weakness of a scheme, which involves indicting accused to preliminary diets and not to trial diets, is that the availability of witnesses will not be known at the preliminary diet. In the Sheriff Court one of the main issues at the first diet is establishing which witnesses have and have not been cited. My consultations disclosed that one of the main reasons for first diets being adjourned is that the information about the citation of witnesses is sketchy 236. The Crown occasionally suffer criticism at the hand of the sheriff, because they have not received an execution of citation or any other information from the police, and cannot say what the position is. They are concerned that, since there would be no confirmation of the citation of witnesses at the preliminary diet, many trial diets would inevitably have to be adjourned and the Crown would have to shoulder the blame.
15.42 The answer to this perceived problem lies in obtaining complete information about the means of contacting witnesses and also obtaining complete information about their availability. The procurator fiscal interviewing witnesses in a High Court case should have a fair idea of the period of four weeks or so during which the trial is most likely to take place. The witnesses' availability at and around that period should be noted. All the information about how the witnesses might be contacted and about their availability should then be checked by whoever has responsibility for citing witnesses, between the service of the indictment and the preliminary diet, so that the Crown can indicate to the Court any dates when an essential witness would not be able to attend. The witness citation body should have access to police computer databases on which are stored details of the availability of police witnesses. In view of the mobility of people and the reluctance of some to be cited, there will inevitably be occasions when the information given to the Court is incomplete. However, the time available between serving the indictment and the preliminary diet for up-to-date checks to be made is longer than the period that is currently usually available to the police to cite the witnesses for trial. The procedures outlined above are much more likely to provide the Crown with accurate information about the location and availability of witnesses than the procedures currently followed.
Jurors
15.43 The Court is acutely conscious of the demands that are made on members of the public to serve as jurors. The Court is also very sensitive to the fact that, in recent years, there has been an increase in the number of occasions on which jurors have attended court but no case has proceeded. That sensitivity has led ironically to a certain reluctance on the part of the Crown to ask for the attendance of prospective jurors when they feel that there is even a possibility that a trial will not proceed.
15.44 If the proposals in this report, designed to bring greater certainty to trial diets, were to prove successful, there would be a substantial reduction in the number of occasions on which jurors attend unnecessarily. This is, therefore, an appropriate time to review the current arrangements for the attendance of jurors.
The Current Arrangements for the Attendance of Jurors
15.45 Jurors are currently expected to attend for up to a week. In a court with more than one courtroom, separate groups of jurors are cited and attend each individual court. Their service at the sitting tends to be, but is not necessarily, confined to that court. The list of jurors for the sitting is divided into groups, and each group is cited to attend a particular court for a particular stage of the sitting. Once a juror has served on a jury, he is generally excused from further service at that sitting, and is excused by statute from further service for 5 years 237. The jurors who are not empanelled remain available for attendance on a daily basis until the period for which they are required expires. They are usually expected to telephone an answering service each evening for a message regarding their further attendance. When they attend and are not empanelled for the jury selected that day, they are generally discharged for the day and expected to call the answering service that evening.
Future arrangements for the attendance of jurors
15.46 Consideration should be given to adopting a number of practices currently followed in England and Wales, which result in fewer members of the public being involved in unnecessary attendance at court, make the jurors' commitment to jury service clearer, and regulate the management of the jury better.
15.47 Jurors in England and Wales attend for jury service for a period, usually a fortnight. They may thus serve on more than one jury. In multi-court centres there is one panel of jurors from which the potential jurors for each court are drawn. Those who are not balloted return to the pool, and they may have to attend another courtroom on the same day to participate in another ballot. Those who are balloted, and serve in a trial which lasts a few days, will return to the pool at the end of the trial to participate in further ballots. It may be that a commitment of two weeks is thought to be too much, but the minimum commitment should not be less than one week.
15.48 In England and Wales jurors attend for jury service expecting to be there for the full day. They are only excused when there is no possibility of another case starting. It should be possible for parties to give a fairly accurate estimate of the anticipated length of the trial at the preliminary diet. They will, however, give only an estimate and not a commitment. To cope with the prospect that some trials will overrun their anticipated span, it will be necessary to make maximum use of time. Since courts in Glasgow and Edinburgh will be running continuously, it should become a regular feature of their business that, as soon as a jury retires in one case, the next trial should start. To enable such efficient use to be made of the time available, it will be necessary on occasions to have jurors and witnesses available throughout the day. That is not a waste of the time of either the jurors or the witnesses. That is simply an essential element of flexibility that must be brought into the system to help secure the greater certainty of trials taking place at or around the time when they are planned to take place.
Jury Excusals
15.49 I have already mentioned the system by which jurors are cited in groups to serve during a part of a sitting. The initial group is either forty-five or fifty strong. Court staff have authority to informally excuse the attendance of jurors who write or telephone to explain a difficulty that they may have about attending. Prior to the date fixed for the jurors' first attendance, up to twelve may be excused in this way. In addition some may not attend. At court the clerk may grant further informal excusals. By the time of the ballot there may be fewer than thirty prospective jurors in attendance. Work commitments are often advanced and accepted as a reason for excusing a juror. Decisions are left to the discretion of court staff 238 It would be much more satisfactory if there were clear guidelines drawn up under the existing framework for the excusal of jurors 239, and if the responsibility for excusing them was confined to one person, or possibly one at each location where preliminary diets are held. A juror should be able to appeal the administrative refusal of excusal to a judge, who would consider the application informally in chambers. It is in the interests of justice that the widest possible cross- section of the public should serve on juries, and excusal should be fairly exceptional.
Management of the Jury
15.50 During a trial it is normal practice for accused and legal representatives to be assembled in court before, first of all the jury, and then the judge, are brought in. When the jury arrive in court, the atmosphere remains informal and silence is not observed. It is only when the judge enters that order is imposed. The judge is first to leave at the close of proceedings. That brings formal order to an end, and restores informality. It may then take the jury a minute or two to leave the court. Anything might be said and overheard during that period. Great care is taken during a trial to ensure that the jury do not hear evidence which may not be admitted. When an objection is taken to the admissibility of evidence, the jury are generally invited to retire while the matter is debated in their absence. Just as much care should be taken to avoid anything said informally being overheard by the jury in court when they first enter or immediately before they leave. That would be achieved if the jury were last to enter the court at the start of proceedings and first to leave at the end. Order would have been imposed by the arrival of the judge before them, and would be maintained by his continued presence in court until they had left.
The Court Day
15.51 Views differ about the desirability of the court sitting beyond 4.00pm. Some argue that jurors cannot concentrate any longer. Others point to the need for some to travel a distance. Both are matters which can be dealt with in the particular circumstances of any given case. The ability of jurors to concentrate will depend on the nature of the material they are hearing and the manner of its presentation. In general, however, it should be possible for jurors to concentrate for three hours between 10.00am and 1.00pm, and for a further two and a half hours between 2.00pm and 4.30pm. That should be the standard day, subject to modification by the judge where that is considered appropriate. It was pointed out in one submission that an extra one-half hour each day in each court in Glasgow is the equivalent of one week of court time in every two, or twenty six weeks of court time in a full year.
« Previous | Contents | Next »