Get documents about "Crown Court
Document Sample
Crown Court
Annual Report 2005 - 2006
St Albans Crown Court
www.hmcourts-service.gov.uk
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
RESIDENT JUDGE & COURT MANAGER COMMENTS:
Workload, capacity and time taken for cases to come to trial
The Court workload has continued to increase overall particularly in relation to trials as a result of Hertfordshire’s
continued success in Narrowing the Justice Gap. By the end of October the outstanding trial workload reached an all
time high at 433. It has reduced since then to 369 but is starting to climb again. Actual receipts from Hertfordshires
PSA’s in 2002/03 were 702, in 2003/04 810, in 2004/05 842 and in 2005/06 904. This is a level of workload a four
court centre cannot hope to contain. Luton due their own workload pressures have not been able to assist us with a
transfer arrangement. Hence for the whole of the year apart from days when the venue has been required to be used for
Justices Training our only option has been to use Cheshunt Magistrates’ Court effectively as a fifth “satellite court”.
Cheshunt has its limitations because of the quite out of date accommodation not least dock and cell capacity which
dictates no more than 1 custody defendant or 2 on bail at any given time. We have also more recently been holding
hearings of block weeks at Watford County Court to dispose of appeals and allow the main centre to concentrate on the
trials. This has been achieved with no extra staff resource. The Court sittings days allocation was increased to meet this
need and in the main the Judicial Secretariat have been able to find us the Judiciary to sit there. Of course our use of
Cheshunt has impacted on the Magistrates’ court workload in the East and, inevitably on their timeliness.
With a consistent plea rate of 50/51% the court can dispose of approximately 650 cases a year. In the year 2004/05 the
plea rate at St Albans was 54.6% and was a cause for concern then. This year it has declined quite dramatically by 12%
to 42.6%. The Chief Constable has again made it clear at the Criminal Justice Board that there will be no let up in the
arrest rate over the coming year. The court has exceeded the performance targets in relation to Appeals and Committals
for Sentence, custody disposals within 16 weeks or less in relation to committals for trial and custody disposals within
26 weeks in relation to Section 51 cases. Overall the impact of such a high caseload is reflected in timeliness standing at
71.24% cumulatively. Generally more and more bail cases have got old because we have not been able to list them in
the interest of prioritising other cases and the impact on timeliness when they are disposed of will be felt for the
foreseeable future. 2 courtrooms at Central Magistrates’ Court are currently being upgraded to Crown Court standard to
allow for dual functionality. This will be completed in June and then decisions will be taken as to any potential Crown
Court use of 1 of the courtrooms in the first instance. Because of listing timescales at central it would be unlikely we
could sit there until December in any event.
Type and length of cases heard at the court, including any changes or issues that have arisen
The Court continues to deal with all classes of case with Class 1 & 2 accounting for 7.7% of the workload. HHJ Bevan
QC at Luton has a Murder ticket but given Luton have a larger workload of that nature His Honour Judge Baker QC
still assists by trying some of their cases. His Honour has also recently tried 2 Murders from the Central Criminal Court.
WE recognise the need for comity between courts but the effect of taking in serious outside work has had an adverse
impact on our ability to dispose of our own cases.
The causes of ineffective trials and avoidable cracked trials
The court has again achieved a decrease in the number and percentage ineffective trials. The interventions by the Case
Progression Officer clearly pay dividends as do the case progression meetings held with the CPS Case Progression
Officer for whom of course the CPS have not been specifically funded. There is no guarantee that the CPS will fund the
CPO position in 2006/7. Not taking risks with floaters has also worked very well, striking a balance by not risking the
sitting times which we also achieved. We performed very well achieving 12.6% ineffectives against the 16.5% target.
The new target for 2006/07 is 15%. The cracked trials however remain very high very largely due to late guilty pleas
entered on the day of trial. The end year figure for cracked trials of 32.2% is virtually the same as last year.
Court User meetings and the results of steps taken to analyse the figures on ineffective trials and hold meetings
with the CPS, police and the local profession
Court User meetings chaired by the Resident Judge continue to be held on a quarterly basis where performance and an
issues arising therefrom are discussed on an overview basis. The Resident Judge, List Office and CPO attends monthly
delivery group meetings where the data is analysed more critically and closely to identify and address any areas where
performance is not meeting the standard. The latter meetings are also attended by the CPS Crown Court Unit Head, the
CPS Case Progression Officer and a representative from the LCJB performance team. The Court and CPS Case
Progression Officers continue to meet for case readiness meetings once a fortnight together with the manager of the
Crown Court Witness Care Unit.
St Albans Crown Court Page 2
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
The extent to which trial dates are being vacated because orders are not complied with
In the last 6 months of the 431 trials warned or fixed 62 were vacated equalling some 14.3 %. Due to the size of the
workload for a court centre of this size a large percentage of cases are vacated because we cannot get them listed.
Witnesses and jurors and others who use the court
The police standby scheme continues to operate effectively without disruption to the court and work continues to be
done with the other members of the No Witness No Justice Project team to enhance the care of witnesses from the
outset and throughout the life of the case. Witness waiting times targets were met in the last 2 surveys. In November we
achieved 62%against the 51% target. There is still to do to further improve staggering of witnesses and witness
attendance in general. The statistical information below shows that the level of witnesses called unnecessarily continues
to rise at 39.7%. The trial effectiveness meetings also have the benefit of capturing any witness issues that may have
arisen recently or been overlooked. The Court Manager in the latter part of the year was appointed as HMCS
Hertforshires Area Witness Champion. We narrowly missed our challenging jury utilisation target at 65.6% against
68%. We have had some tremendous results using the PVL video conferencing facilities to link up to witnesses abroad
as far away as Australia. The live link to a critical witness in a Rape trial who was in France led to the conviction of the
defendant. Working through the Area Judicial Forum the court has produced uniform advice to local Judges, recorders
and Magistrates on the treatment of witnesses, victims and jurors in court.
The performance of the Prison Escort Contract
The service in general meets our needs but there have been sustained periods in the last quarter where lack of staff has
impacted severely on the day to day running of the courts. This has been addressed with the GSL contracts manager
who has agreed to increase the overall staffing level and service has started to improve. There are concerns around non
production of an average of 2 defendants a month of late because the fact they were in custody has been overlooked by
the prison. There are also still instances of delivery to the wrong court of defendants destined for Cheshunt which a year
on of running it is unacceptable. Dean Reeves of PECS is due to meet with the Court Manager in June to address any
issues we have.
School visits and other work with community, including involvement of the police at court, through police liaison
officer
The Court continues to encourage and organise a wide range of visits. These include week long work experience
placements, day visits from other CJS agencies, University of Hertfordshire Law students and Judge’s marshals. We
took part in the Inside Justice Week Open Day at central Magistrates Court and the Office Manager has taken part in
holding mock interviews at a school. There is a programme of groups of new police officers attending court after
business hours for coaching sessions by our very experienced police liason officer on the requirements of giving
evidence at court and the role of the OIC at court which has proved to work very well. We have not been quite so
successful this year due to many changes in staff and the pressures of the workload that require us to focus on the
immediate needs of the business. With the financial position as it is for 2006/07 it is very likely the ability to take part
in such things will be limited.
Accommodation, including facilities for victims and witnesses
We have continued to be active in promoting the Wider Markets Initiative and have raised £7,700 much from the
filming of Judge John Deed (a TV programme) overall of which we were entitled to £3,000 and the remainder was for
use by the other Courts in the Area as a whole. To raise further monies we have volunteered to be a pilot site for civil
weddings. There are real concerns about the potential effects of the total ban on smoking due later this year. We do not
have external secure areas to house jurors and witnesses which will either mean they cannot smoke until they are able to
leave the site or that during breaks they will all be congregating outside the main entrance which will be highly
unsatisfactory.
The operation or installation of Link or XHIBIT and any other IT issues
LINK and Xhibit are well and truly embedded in our day to day business processes. Xhibit has been live at this court for
16 months. Due to the high workload balanced against the court clerk resource getting results out on time to meet the
timescales for the PNC is a daily challenge. We are still not satisfied that the court is adequately served by the
production of accurate and detailed orders and directions. This aspect of case management needs further work
St Albans Crown Court Page 3
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
especially from the court clerks. The use of Secure Email continues to deliver benefits with the extra benefits realised
by the recent introduction of more pre trial mandatory flows which still has some issues that we expect can be resolved
quite easily. We have had our CCTV system upgraded to include more camera coverage and the ability to burn
recordings straight to DVD which has allowed the police to have this for evidential purposes several times in the last
few months.
RESIDENT JUDGE:
Michael Baker
DATE:
23 May 2006
COURT MANAGER:
Sheila Moran
DATE:-
23 May 2006
Comments end here
St Albans Crown Court Page 4
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
OVERVIEW (by the Resident Judge)
AIMS - The three strategic judicial aims of this Court remain (1) the efficient and just dispatch within Hertfordshire of
all work received, (2) the maintenance of close liaison with the Magistracy and (3) where it is appropriate, participation
jointly with the Magistracy in the promotion of the Criminal Justice System within the County. In the course of the
year various events and factors have worked to make those aims more difficult to achieve. Some have even appeared to
challenge their validity as legitimate aims for a local Crown Court to entertain. Nevertheless we remain determined
both to retain them and to seek their achievement.
WORKLOAD - The workload figures shown in the body of this report are troubling. Especially so, given that they do
not include approximately one third of the work generated in the County, which is committed and sent directly from the
St Albans Crown Court Page 5
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
North Hertfordshire PSD to Luton Crown Court. Also worrying is the fact that we cannot put our finger on the reason
for the significant reduction in cases outstanding per Court between October and April. A great many cases were
disposed of during that period. It would be easy to attribute that to increased efficiency or harder work by the staff and
judiciary. There is no evidence of either. We believe that all concerned have simply continued to work at the same
high level of commitment and efficiency throughout the year.
PEOPLE – (1) The move of Judge Cripps to Aylesbury has been a significant loss. He shifted a disproportionate
quantity of work. The anticipated acquisition of two new Judges is, of course, a boon. (2) It is not satisfactory that both
our Court Manager and our Listing Officer remain appointed only in an “acting” capacity. They richly deserve proper
recognition. The fact that this Court performs as well as it does is substantially due both to their own performance and
their ability to lead the team – many of whom are young and relatively inexperienced. (3) It is gratifying to report that
there is a commitment to our primary strategic aim by all our Court staff and that they have kept our performance at the
level it is despite being significantly below strength in numbers at times.
PROPERTY - Until we acquire Court space close enough to manage from St Albans we will continue to struggle to
dispose of cases efficiently. Cheshunt is a necessary stop-gap but its distance and lack of facilities are not conducive to
the efficient disposal of work. Our hopes of using Courts in St Albans Magistrates’ Court were dashed (we hope only
temporarily) when the Lord Chancellor deemed it necessary to embark on further consultation. We have striven, we
believe successfully, to maintain good relations with the Magistrates throughout the unfortunate episode. Our
underlying need remains the same. This need could very easily grow acute again at very short notice. That is the
message from our volatile workload figures.
WIDER PICTURE - The arrangements for NOMS, the Police Force restructuring proposals and the new HMCS area
proposals, all seem to ignore the fundamental need of local courts (especially Magistrates’ Courts) to operate and be
managed locally. We cherish our Magistrates. Furthermore, we recognise the need for them to operate within a
geographical locality to which they can give loyalty. We will do whatever we can through the Area Judicial Forum and
other routes both to help them represent their concerns to the Local Criminal Justice Board and to support them in every
other way we can. We are, after all, all part of the same service.
CONCLUSION - This has not been an easy year, and there are more systemic and budgetary difficulties ahead. It is
almost inevitable that these will inhibit our capacity to achieve the targets which are set for us. Nevertheless morale is
high and, with ingenuity, commitment and hard work at all levels we intend to continue to give a good account of
ourselves.
Michael Baker
Resident Judge
RESIDENT JUDGE: Michael Baker DATE: 23 May 2006
St Albans Crown Court Page 6
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
Crown Court Receipts by Offence Group
Note these exclude Bench Warrants, transfer in and transfer out cases. They are receipts from magistrates only.
Group 2004- % of 2005- % of
2005 Total 2006 Total
Burglary 80 11% 50 7%
Criminal damage 18 2% 10 1%
Drug offences 88 12% 84 11%
Fraud and forgery 44 6% 50 7%
Indictable motoring 25 3% 27 4%
offences
Other indictable offences 69 9% 80 11%
(excl motoring)
Robbery 63 8% 54 7%
Summary Motoring 0 0% 1 0%
Sexual offences 72 10% 72 10%
Summary Non-Motoring 13 2% 7 1%
Theft and handling 74 10% 74 10%
stolen goods
Violence against the 207 27% 244 32%
person
Total 753 100% 753 100%
300
244
250
207
200
150
100 88
80 84 80
72 72 74 74
69
63
54
50 50
44
50
25 27
18
10 13
7
0 1
0
Theft and handling
Fraud and forgery
Drug offences
Criminal damage
Robbery
Summary Non-Motoring
Indictable motoring
Burglary
Sexual offences
Other indictable
Summary Motoring
Violence against the
offences (excl
stolen goods
motoring)
offences
person
2004-2005 2005-2006
St Albans Crown Court Page 7
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
Crown Court Disposals by Offence Group
Group 2004- % of 2005- % of
2005 Total 2006 Total
Burglary 69 10% 56 7%
Criminal damage 15 2% 11 1%
Drug offences 75 11% 99 12%
Fraud and forgery 38 6% 51 6%
Indictable motoring 20 3% 27 3%
offences
Other indictable offences 68 10% 84 10%
(excl motoring)
Robbery 52 8% 62 8%
Summary Motoring 0 0% 1 0%
Sexual offences 73 11% 84 10%
Summary Non-Motoring 15 2% 11 1%
Theft and handling 68 10% 71 9%
stolen goods
Violence against the 175 26% 256 31%
person
Total 668 100% 813 100%
300
256
250
200
175
150
99
100
84 84
75 73
69 68 68 71
62
56 52
51
50 38
27
20
15 11 15 11
0 1
0
Theft and handling
Fraud and forgery
Drug offences
Criminal damage
Robbery
Indictable motoring
Burglary
Sexual offences
Summary Non-
Other indictable
Summary Motoring
Violence against the
offences (excl
stolen goods
motoring)
Motoring
offences
person
2004-2005 2005-2006
St Albans Crown Court Page 8
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
Workload
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
Trial Receipts 79,704 584 674 744 846 915 8.2%
Class 1, 2 6% 7% 7% 7% 6% 8% 29.4%
Class 3 94% 93% 93% 93% 94% 92% -1.8%
Trial Receipts by Class
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
% Trials
93% 93% 93% 94% 92% Class 3
50%
Class 1, 2
40%
30%
20%
10%
7% 7% 7% 6% 8%
0%
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
Financial Year
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
Sentence Receipts 33,435 137 191 243 231 245 6.1%
Appeal Receipts 12,997 139 105 125 138 243 76.1%
Disposals 78,332 623 643 647 707 935 32.2%
Plea Rate 56% 40.2% 42.6% 42.2% 49.9% 42.6% -14.6%
Disposal Rate 0.73 0.65 0.66 0.64 0.69 0.78 11.9%
Guilty Plea Rate and Disposal Rate
60.0% 0.90
0.78 0.80
50.0%
0.69
0.66 0.70
0.65 0.64
40.0% 0.60
0.50
DR figure
GP %
Plea Rate
30.0%
Disposal Rate
0.40
49.9%
42.6% 42.2% 42.6%
20.0% 40.2% 0.30
0.20
10.0%
0.10
0.0% 0.00
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
Financial Year
St Albans Crown Court Page 9
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
Outstanding Cases
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
Outstanding Trials 30,995 227 231 297 376 363 -3.5%
Custody % over 16 27% 15.7% 24.3% 25.4% 31.0% 26.7% -13.8%
weeks
Custody % over 36 9% 1.6% 0.0% 3.2% 8.2% 6.9% -15.8%
weeks
Bail % over 16 weeks 32% 18.0% 20.8% 32.7% 28.9% 42.7% 47.9%
Bail % over 36 weeks 11% 5.0% 0.0% 5.3% 6.0% 8.4% 40.8%
Outstanding Cases and the proportion over 36 weeks
400 9.0%
8.4%
8.2% 8.0%
350
7.0%
300
6.9%
6.0%
6.0%
250 5.3% Outstanding Trials
5.0%
5.0%
Custody % over 36 weeks
200 Bail % over 36 weeks
376
363 4.0%
150 297
3.0%
3.2%
227 231
100
2.0%
50 1.6%
1.0%
0.0%
0 0.0%
2001/02 0.0%
2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
Cracked and Ineffective
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
Trials listed (number) 38,076 524 466 449 427 509 19.2%
Ineffective trial rate 13% 24.4% 23.2% 22.3% 18.0% 12.6% -30.3%
Effective trial rate 48% 48.3% 44.6% 48.6% 49.6% 55.2% 11.2%
Cracked trial rate 38% 27.3% 32.2% 29.2% 32.3% 32.2% -0.3%
Ineffective, Effective and Cracked Trials
60.0%
55.2%
49.6%
48.3% 48.6%
50.0%
44.6%
40.0%
32.2% 32.3% 32.2%
29.2% Ineffective trial rate
30.0% 27.3% Effective trial rate
24.4% Cracked trial rate
23.2%
22.3%
20.0% 18.0%
12.6%
10.0%
0.0%
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
Financial Year
St Albans Crown Court Page 10
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
Witness and Juror service1
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
Juror days as % of 57% 57.4% 71.1% 73.3% 64.2% 65.6% 2.2%
attendance
% witnesses waiting 2 52.6% 55.9% 54.4% 59.8% 55.0% 55.7% 1.3%
hours or less
% witnesses attending 45.1% 37.8% 41.1% 24.1% 36.7% 39.7% 8.1%
unnecessarily
Hours waited 2.8 2.5 2.7 3.0 2.8 3.0 6.9%
(witnesses attending
unnecessarily)
Percentage of Witnesses Waiting Within Target and Proportion Waiting Unnecessarily Average Waiting Time for Witnesses Attending Unnecessarily (hours)
70.0% 3.5
59.8%
60.0% 55.9% 3.0
55.0% 55.7%
54.4%
50.0%
2.5
40.0%
41.1% 2.0
39.7%
37.8% 36.7%
30.0%
1.5 3.0 3.0
2.8
2.7
24.1% 2.5
20.0%
1.0
10.0%
0.5
0.0%
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
0.0
Financial Year
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
% witnesses waiting 2 hours or less % witnesses attending unnecessarily Financial Year
Sitting Days
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
Average Trial Hearing 10.0 13.2 11.7 11.1 12.6 9.0 -28.4%
Time (hours)
Average Sitting Day 4.27 4.61 4.54 4.74 4.53 4.39 -3.0%
Length (hours)
Number of sitting days 106,782 960 979 1,013 1,020 1,205 18.1%
Number of Sitting Days & Average Length of Sitting Day
1,400 4.74 5.00
4.61 4.54 4.53
4.39
4.50
1,200
4.00
1,000
3.50
3.00
800
2.50
600 1,205
2.00
979 1,013 1,020
960
1.50
400
1.00
200
0.50
0 0.00
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
Number of sitting days Average Sitting Day Length (hours)
1
Witness Survey data are from the combined June and November survey
St Albans Crown Court Page 11
St Albans Crown Court
Annual Report by the Resident Judge and Court Manager
Waiting Times
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
Average Waiting time 15.9 15.6 13.0 13.9 17.2 19.0 10.9%
(AWT - weeks)
Custody AWT 13.4 13.9 11.7 12.4 13.1 14.9 14.0%
Bail AWT 17.3 16.3 13.5 14.5 19.3 21.3 10.1%
Average Waiting Time
25.0
21.3
20.0
19.3 19.0
17.2
16.3
15.6
15.0 14.9
14.5
13.9 13.9
13.5
13.0 13.1
12.4
11.7
10.0
5.0
0.0
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
Financial Year
Average Waiting time (AWT - weeks) Custody AWT Bail AWT
PSAs
EW 05/06 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 % Diff
% Defendants 77.8% 76.5% 85.7% 80.5% 71.8% 71.2% -0.8%
commencing in target
Committal for Trial 70.6% 65.6% 76.6% 68.2% 58.2% 56.7% -2.6%
Sent for Trial 76.3% 85.1% 91.8% 84.0% 76.8% 72.6% -5.4%
Committal for 89.4% 88.4% 94.1% 94.9% 92.1% 90.5% -1.7%
Sentence
Appeal 88.0% 91.4% 94.9% 93.3% 77.2% 92.4% 19.6%
Percentage Cases Commencing Within Target
(Trials 16 weeks, Sent for Trial 26 weeks, Sentence 10 weeks, Appeal 14 weeks)
100.0%
95.0%
91.8%
90.0%
85.7%
85.0% 85.1%
84.0%
80.5%
80.0%
76.5%
76.8%
75.0% 76.6% 71.8% 71.2%
72.6%
70.0%
68.2%
65.0%
65.6%
60.0%
58.2%
55.0% 56.7%
50.0%
2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06
Financial Year
% Defendants commencing in target Committal for Trial Sent for Trial
St Albans Crown Court Page 12
