We received overwhelmingly positive feedback from delegates following our first annual conference which was held at City Law School on 14th March. The Committee wishes to reiterate its grateful thanks to our speakers and workshop leaders, and also to City Law School for its hospitality. We hope the following notes will provide a flavour of the event for those who were unable to attend. There were also many afternoon workshops run by lawyers, intermediaries, police, a forensic clinical psychologist and a judge.
We have not attempted to summarize these wide-ranging discussions. A short video showing highlights of the day was made for us by young film-maker, Bukola Bakinson, which we hope conveys the animated buzz of the presentations and discussions. Jenny Talbot of the Prison Reform Trust spoke of the prevalence, within the criminal justice system, of vulnerable suspects and defendants who have communication and comprehension difficulties. The statistics she quoted were compelling. Jenny spoke of the limited language ability and memory capacity, literacy difficulties, and a tendency towards acquiescence of very many offenders. She then described the experiences of those with learning difficulties at court, showed a short but powerful video, and spoke eloquently of the need for reasonable adjustments to be made in order to provide support for such individuals.
Criminal Practice Directions 2013 stated that 'The court is required to take every reasonable step to encourage and facilitate the participation of any person, including the defendant. This includes enabling a defendant to give their best evidence and to comprehend the trial proceedings and engage fully with his or her defence'.
Delegates also learnt about the work of the Prison Reform Trust which aims to create a just, humane and effective penal system. Miranda Bevan of the Law Commission outlined a questionnaire and related discussions, the results of which would be published in June 2015. The Law Commission was considering, among other issues, the arguments for statutory entitlement to intermediary input for vulnerable defendants, such that effective participation could potentially replace unfitness to plead. She discussed the inequity of current provision arising out of the existing legal framework and limited availability even of non-registered intermediaries. A registered intermediary scheme for defendants, like that for vulnerable witnesses, could potentially ensure wider provision, consistent training and CPD and increased public confidence. Miranda reported that many judges were now granting intermediary input for the duration of trials; but it was acknowledged this had potential funding implications. Although an argument could be made for a matching service, it was again acknowledged that resources are limited in terms of trained intermediaries.
Post graduate researcher Kim Turner of Her Majesty's Prison YOI Feltham presented further compelling statistics (e.g. that 60% of offenders have speech, language and communication difficulties). Misunderstandings between such individuals, police and lawyers are known to occur frequently. By way of example, 'Do you understand?' was a question frequently asked but unlikely to ascertain if someone really had understood. Kim reported that one vulnerable defendant had summed up his experience of a trial as 'Blah, blah, blah . . . guilty'. She commended the involvement of intermediaries with defendants and urged CJS personnel to expect defendants to have communication needs, to keep information and questions simple, to check back frequently, and if in doubt to seek advice.
Helen Johnson, Solicitor Advocate, considered how an intermediary can can make the difference in a defendant's fitness to plead, giving them the potential to achieve effective participation throughout the trial; to give instruction to their barrister, and give evidence in court or via video. With the aid of intermediaries, she described how vulnerable defendants may be enabled to give evidence and express how they are feeling, by use of their preferred communication methods which may include signs, symbols or cue cards.Helen indicated it is for the intermediary to reassure prosecution that they are non-partisan, do not intervene on the defendant's behalf and do not limit the questions that can be asked “ simply the way they should be asked.K
ids Company staff described 'The inside Story', recounting their experiences as young suspects and defendants, and the sense of alienation engendered by use of legal language that they could not understand. This joint presentation, delivered in an accessible and candid way by four brave speakers, was extremely powerful.
Shauneen Lambe, barrister from Just for Kids Law, entitled her presentation 'Intermediaries and the law where now?'. She described a gradual evolution within the criminal justice system and compared the old guard and the 'new kids on the block'. Her central argument was for a 'level playing field' for vulnerable suspects and defendants. Shauneen referenced Criminal Practice Directions 2014 which state: 'There is currently no statutory provision in force for intermediaries for defendants. Section 104 Coroners and Justice Act 2009 (not yet implemented) creates a new section 33BA of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999. This will provide an intermediary to an eligible defendant only while giving evidence. A court may use its inherent powers to appoint an intermediary to assist the defendant's communication at trial (either solely when giving evidence or throughout the trial) and, where necessary, in preparation for trial.'
Intermediaries, Shauneen advised, should be confident of their specific expertise, express their concerns to relevant people, keep contemporaneous records and ensure they are adequately informed by a defence lawyer. They should specify in reports how best to enable a vulnerable defendant to participate effectively; and explain why the defendant frequently needs an intermediary for the taking of instructions and participation in other parts of the court process, not just for giving evidence. Shauneen also introduced delegates to Just for Kids Law who aim to be the UK's leading experts in youth justice, sharing knowledge and expertise and modelling good practice across the country. Just for Kids Law delivers individually tailored holistic, client-led assistance to vulnerable children and young people, supporting them from crisis through to stability and thence to independence.
Jan Jones, Chair of Intermediaries for Justice, closed our 2105 Conference, by thanking all speakers and inviting delegates to network over tea and cake. She urged all to look out for our March 2016 Conference "Joined up Justice" which is planned to be held in the Midlands and will focus on joint working with victims and witnesses.