Lay Magistrates

To become a lay magistrate, the individual must first apply to the appropriate local advisory committee, is expected to live within 15 miles of their local justice area, be able to commit to at least 26 half days a year and be within the required age bracket of 18-65. This should give the potential Magistrate an advantage of local knowledge, issues and a diverse age range.

The Magistrates history began in 1195 when Richard I appointed knights as ‘Keepers of the peace” who would uphold the law in unruly areas of the country. The 1361 Justices of peace Act saw Magistrates powers become more judicial and over time developed beyond criminal proceedings to civil matters, administrative roles such as wage regulation, provision of prisons and the power to grant marriage. However in more recent times, many of these roles have been passed onto local councils (Makey, M 2012).

Magistrates are supposed to represent a cross section of society however; statistics indicate that Magistrates tend to be older, 40% retired from work and a majority are from professional classes with managerial backgrounds – Martin, J (2010). This indicates that a true demographic of the public is not being represented. This could be one of the causes of the inconsistencies in sentencing, as the Magistrates are out of touch with the poorer areas of their community and may have bias opinions towards certain behaviours.

It could be that many working class people cannot afford to take time off work and serve as a Magistrate; it could also be that 33% of the public in 2000 were unaware that magistrates where local people with no professional legal qualification serving as volunteers, according to research by Morgan and Russell that year (http://sixthformlaw.info).

Anyone with; any serious criminal convictions, undischarged bankrupts, members of the forces, police or traffic wardens, anyone with relatives working within the local justice system, hearing impaired or by reason of infirmity cannot carry out all the duties of a justice of the peace are exempt, as is anyone with any possible conflict of interest. - Martin, J (2010).

Successful applicants go onto a 2 stage vetting process where they are firstly interviewed to see if they match the required criteria laid out by the Lord Chancellor 1998, which are good character, understanding and communication, social awareness, maturity and sound temperament, sound judgment and commitment and reliability (Ibid).

The committee will also seek to explore their personal attitudes towards various criminal justice issues like criminal damage, antisocial behaviour, drink driving, youth crime and probe for conflicting interests, it is particularly important that they are able to assimilate factual information and make a reasoned decision upon it (Ibid).

Social awareness as well as other qualities mentioned, is relative and subjective to the individual, the interviewer and the interviewee. Middle aged, middle minded and middle class. Martin, J (2010). Moreover not everyone possesses the 6 qualities laid out by the Lord Chancellor; consequentially Magistrates will not represent a majority of society (http://www.sixthformlaw.info)

The advisory committee is comprised of Magistrates, the Lord-Lieutenant and other lay people. Social issues that affect these people are not necessarily the same issues that affect the people they are dealing with. This could lead to conflicting interests.

For the second part of the appointment process, potential candidates are presented with at least 2 case studies of what might be the typical types of case they will be dealing with seeking to test the potential candidates judicial aptitude. Successful candidates’ names are then presented to the Lord Chancellor, who then appoints new magistrates on behalf of the Queen under recommendations of the local advisory committees, a much criticised method of appointment - Martin, J (2010).

It could be that people of a higher social stature and class are judging lower class and working class people for crimes committed under circumstances they cannot comprehend, there is a noted risk of Magistrates being prosecution-bias and case hardened over time, a number of overriding factors are supposed to counteract this behaviour; they sit on rotating panels, the training provides impartial decision making and Magistrates are obliged to explain their judicial decisions (http://www.sithformlaw.info).

Upon appointment, new Magistrates undergo compulsory basic training on managing themselves, working as a team, and making and managing judicial decisions, all impartially. Most of the training is provided by the justices’ Clerk in court, or sometimes by weekend courses. Since 1998, a magistrates training has been monitored closely. – Martin, J (2010).

There were some criticisms before this as Magistrates where required to attend a set amount of hours, but there was no assessment to see how much they had understood. In 1998, the Magistrates New Training Initiative (NMTI) was introduced and refined in 2004 (NMTI2). The Lord Chancellor is obliged to provide training and necessary materials as laid out in section 19(3) of the Courts Act 2003 (Ibid).

There are also criticisms that the training is variable in quality and inadequate for the workload. This poor training may be the cause of marked variations in sentencing and granting of bail between different benches (Ibid).

There is also evidence of prosecution-bias behaviour within the Magistrates court believing the police too readily, with only a 20% acquittal rate, in comparison 60% of the defendants pleading not guilty at the Crown court were (Ibid).

This could also have something to do with juries of 12 at the Crown Court having to decide beyond reasonable doubt if the defendant is guilty of a crime, whereas the only 3 Magistrates need decide in this instance, this could be denying a suspects basic human right to a fair trial.

Upon completing the basic training whilst observing cases, a new magistrate is expected to sit as a ‘winger’ to a more experienced magistrate and listen to cases as part of panel of 3.

Magistrates are an integral part of the justice system here in the UK with around 600 magistrates’ courts in England and Wales. They deal with 97% of all criminal cases from start to finish and the preliminary hearings of the remaining 3% as well as some civil court proceedings. They are cost effective, at around a fifth of the cost of a Crown Court trial with very few appeals.

They are allowed to handout prison sentences of up to 6 months, community orders and up to £5000 in fines for summery offences or triable-either-way offences.

Summary offences are the least serious of crimes and include nearly all driving offences, common assault and criminal damage less than the value of £5000.

Triable-either-way offences are middle range crimes and can be tried at the magistrates or the crown court depending on the seriousness; these include criminal damage over £5000, theft and ABH.

The defendant is asked how they would like to plead. If guilty, the case can be tried and sentenced in the Magistrates court, if their sentencing power is adequate for the seriousness of the crime, if not, the case is passed on to the crown court where defendant can request a trial by jury.

Magistrates duties also include issuing warrants to the police, remand hearings, transfer proceedings and bail applications as well as civil matters like enforcing debts owed to utility companies, none payment of council tax, T.V licences, granting licences for betting or gaming establishments and licences for the sale of alcohol which have been refused by local councils.

Magistrates also deal with young offenders between the ages of 10-17; such magistrates must be under 65 and be part of a mixed bench.

Lay magistrates are used to allow for a fairer trial by people of similar social status. Although they have no professional legal qualification, they are given basic training to allow them to carry out their role. Most of the decisions only take common sense after analysing the facts, the Justices Clerk advises the magistrates on any points of law needed this could be viewed as a criticism by law professionals.

There’s also a special Family Court panel to deal with emergency cases such as protection against violence, restraining orders, adoption orders and any proceedings under the Children Act 1989.

According to research by Professor Andrew Sanders in 2001, public confidence in the British Magistrates courts is low. Trial-by-jury is assumed the best system for dealing with criminals; therefore we should aim to make magistrates proceedings more like Crown Court trials (http://www.sixthformlaw.info).

Morgan and Russell found that court practitioners have more faith in District judges than Magistrates, also the same research showed that lay Magistrates where thought to reflect suspects community better and more likely to sympathise with their circumstances, a direct contradiction of the public opinion quote above mentioned.