Crown courts at ‘breaking point' as backlog reaches new record high
Crown courts are at 'breaking point' and there will be 100,000 outstanding criminal cases by 2028, a minister has warned, as the backlog reaches a new record high.
Official figures published on Thursday show there were 76,957 open cases waiting to be heard at the end of March, up 11 per cent on the previous year. A quarter of those — some 18,093 cases — have already been open for a year or more.
Last month, The Independent revealed trials are being listed for 2029 as the backlog leaves defendants and victims waiting up for four years for justice.
It comes as Sir Brian Leveson prepares to publish a report on 'once-in-a-generation' reforms to the courts system to reduce the load on the crown courts.
Responding to the latest figures, minister for courts and legal services, Sarah Sackman KC MP, said: 'Despite the hard work of people across the criminal justice system the situation in our Crown Court is reaching breaking point.
'We inherited a courts crisis with an ever-growing backlog which, at its current rate of increase, will hit 100,000 before 2028.
'It is simply unacceptable that any victim has to wait years to see justice done and it is clear the status quo is not working.
'Only radical reform can deliver swifter justice for victims and that is why we asked Sir Brian Leveson to make recommendations for once-in-a-generation change, to be published in the coming weeks.'
The government asked Sir Brian to consider major overhauls, including giving magistrates' more sentencing powers and introducing intermediate courts which would see some cases tried by a judge and two magistrates, rather than a lengthy jury trial.
He will also consider how new technology, including Artificial Intelligence, could be used to drive efficiencies in the courts.
However the Law Society has warned only 'sustained investment' across the justice sector will tackle the backlog, arguing that establishing a new court will 'waste money, time and energy'.
The trial of a 38-year-old mother from south London is among those facing 'jaw dropping' delays after it was listed for 3 January 2029.
She will face a charge of possession with intent to supply cannabis, which she denies, in a two-day hearing at Woolwich Crown Court.
In another case, likely to last three days, three men will stand trial at the same court, on 15 January, over the theft of motor vehicles, which they also deny.
The cases were described by Stephen Nelson, the barrister representing the woman and one of the men, as 'straightforward and not complicated" – and said the delays were 'jaw-dropping'. He warned that one client was in poor health and might not live to see his case come to trial in 2029.
In March, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood announced judges will sit collectively for 110,000 days in the next year, 4,000 more than allocated for the previous period, to help victims see justice done faster.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Much Will the Supreme Court Let Trump Get Away With? We Got an Ominous Sign This Week.
Donald Trump won the presidency in part on promises to deport immigrants who have criminal records and lack permanent legal status. But his earliest executive orders—trying to undo birthright citizenship, suspending critical refugee programs—made clear he wants to attack immigrants with permanent legal status too. In our series Who Gets to Be American This Week?, we'll track the Trump administration's attempts to exclude an ever-growing number of people from the American experiment. For the past six months, President Donald Trump and his administration have contorted, stress-tested, and outright violated law to achieve his delusional 1 million deportations goal. The judicial system has been a critical check, forcing the federal government to follow the law—and at times it has worked as intended. But the Supreme Court has been throwing wrenches in our legal machinery that often seem to defy logic. In an order released this week, the court's conservative justices signaled they are unwilling to stand up to the Trump administration and would rather allow the White House to simply defy our justice system as it pleases. Meanwhile, one victim of the Trump administration's lawlessness, Kilmar Abrego Garcia, was finally brought back to the U.S. after being mistakenly deported four months ago. But thanks to a newly unveiled criminal indictment and a pending immigration detainer, it's highly unlikely that he will be returning home to his wife and children anytime soon. Here's the immigration news we're keeping an eye on this week: Less than three months after the Supreme Court shot down an injunction preventing deportations under the Alien Enemies Act, it released another historic shadow docket decision. The majority of the justices chose to lift a lower court judge's injunction that had, up until Monday, prevented the federal government from removing immigrants from the U.S. to third countries, instead of their home country of origin, without at least giving them advance notice and allowing them to object on the grounds that they face torture there. 'The court's order is certainly apt to have immediate and devastating consequences for all those in the crosshairs of the administration's chaotic and increasingly random deportation campaign,' Deborah Pearlstein, director of Princeton University's Program in Law and Public Policy and a professor of law and public affairs, told me. 'Moreover, it sends a really frightening signal about whether the court is going to stand up to what are increasingly blatant instances of administration defiance of court orders.' The Supreme Court's intervention comes after the Trump administration repeatedly violated U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy's orders by attempting to send migrants to South Sudan, Libya, and El Salvador. The targets of this scheme argue that they will be tortured and killed if removed to these countries, making their expulsions unlawful under the Convention Against Torture and various federal laws. Murphy ruled that, at a minimum, the government must tell migrants where they are being sent, and give them an opportunity to object, with the assistance of counsel, on the grounds that they'll be tortured there. Roughly two weeks after Murphy issued his injunction mandating this due process, the Trump administration defied it. And yet, on Monday, SCOTUS rewarded the government by sweeping away the injunction and allowing these potentially lethal removals to resume. The high court's decision shocks the conscience, as it effectively allows the federal government to get away scot-free with defying a lower court judge's order, establishing an extraordinarily dangerous precedent. It also subjects thousands of migrants to potential torture and death overseas in clear violation of federal law. And the justices offered zero explanation, since they issued their order on the shadow docket. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, wrote a scathing dissent. 'Apparently, the court finds the idea that thousands will suffer violence in far-flung locales more palatable,' Sotomayor wrote, 'than the remote possibility that a District Court exceeded its remedial powers when it ordered the Government to provide notice and process to which the plaintiffs are constitutionally and statutorily entitled.' The Supreme Court's decision is especially alarming in light of a new whistleblower complaint, Pearlstein noted. In the complaint, a Justice Department lawyer accused Emil Bove III, Trump's former personal attorney who has been named principal associate deputy attorney general, of telling subordinates he was willing to ignore court orders to fulfill Trump's mass deportation agenda. (Trump has nominated Bove to a federal appeals court; at his Senate hearing on Thursday, Republicans dismissed the complaint as partisan retribution.) 'I feel less confident in the court's willingness to stand up for an independent judiciary than at any point since Trump's inauguration,' Pearlstein said. After being mistakenly deported to El Salvador, denied due process, and placed in the country's notorious Terrorism Confinement Center for roughly three months, 29-year-old Kilmar Abrego Garcia was finally brought back to the U.S. this month. Now he faces a dubious federal indictment and is in federal custody. And despite U.S. Magistrate Judge Barbara D. Holmes declaring he's eligible for pretrial release, it's unlikely he'll be going back to his family in Maryland anytime soon. On June 13, Abrego Garcia saw his wife and mother for the first time since before his March deportation, in a Tennessee courtroom where his lawyers argued against the Department of Justice's allegations that Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang and smuggled migrants across the country. During a hearing over whether he should be held in pretrial detention, Abrego Garcia's defense attorney insisted he doesn't pose a serious flight risk, arguing that the government provided 'zero' facts to prove that his client has a history of evading arrest or engaging in willful international travel recently, or has strong relations in countries that cause him to seek refuge there or any prior felony convictions. Over the weekend, Judge Holmes ultimately agreed. She noted that the government's evidence that Abrego Garcia is a member of MS-13 'consists of general statements, all double hearsay, from two cooperating witnesses,' both of whom have serious criminal histories and hope to avoid deportation or prison time if they cooperate with prosecutors. The very same day that Holmes ordered Abrego Garcia's release, government lawyers filed a motion to stay her decision. Homeland Security has an active immigration detainer against Abrego Garcia, which the Department of Justice says means 'he will remain in custody pending deportation and Judge Holmes' release order would not immediately release him to the community under any circumstance.' Abrego Garcia says he was fleeing death threats and extortion by a local gang when he first entered the U.S. in 2012 at 16 years old. In 2019, he was arrested for loitering but had no previous criminal record, and a judge granted him protection from being deported back to El Salvador, where he allegedly faced persecution. Despite that, the Trump administration deported Abrego Garcia in March—a move that officials admitted was an error—on flights that took off in defiance of a judge's restraining order. And despite the Supreme Court ruling in April that the government must 'facilitate' the return of Abrego Garcia to the U.S. so he could receive due process, he was not flown back until June. In recent weeks, masked federal agents have raided car washes and other businesses in Southern California, even stationing themselves outside Dodger Stadium. (The team denied Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents entry to the stadium itself.) In one incident, according to the Los Angeles Times, a man stopped his unmarked car in the middle of an intersection, took out his pistol, and aimed it at a group of pedestrians. He did not hurt anyone, eventually getting back into the car and driving off with red and blue emergency lights flashing. After reviewing surveillance footage, Pasadena police Chief Gene Harris told the newspaper his department concluded the man was in fact an ICE agent. 'They show up without uniforms. They show up completely masked. They refuse to give ID,' Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said during a press conference. 'Who are these people? And frankly, the vests that they have on look like they ordered them from Amazon. Are they bounty hunters? Are they vigilantes? If they're federal officials, why is it that they do not identify themselves?' Similar scenes have been playing out in other parts of the country in recent months. Back in March, Tufts University doctoral student Rumeysa Ozturk was arrested by federal agents dressed in plainclothes and face masks and forced into an unmarked van. In Chicago earlier this month, masked ICE agents raided a building where an immigrant supervision program operates. At least 10 people were taken away in vans, with no clear understanding of why they were detained. 'We don't know who is arresting our brothers and sisters, because they are hiding behind masks,' Michael Rodriguez, a city alderman, told CBS News. New York City Comptroller Brad Lander, who himself was arrested last week, witnessed immigrants getting arrested at a Manhattan immigration court 'by the same non-uniformed, masked ICE agents who gave no reason for their removal, ripped them out of the arms of escorts in a proceeding that bears no resemblance to justice,' he told CBS News. California state Sen. Scott Wiener compared federal agents' tactics to 'Nazi-level thuggery,' and has introduced legislation that would ban local, state, and federal law enforcement from covering their faces when interacting with the public—with some exceptions. Violations would amount to a misdemeanor charge. ICE acting director Todd Lyons defended the agency's use of masks, arguing it protects agents from people who 'don't like what immigration enforcement is.' He also blamed sanctuary jurisdictions, where local authorities do not cooperate with federal immigration enforcement, suggesting masks would not be necessary if they 'would change their policy.'
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Motorcyclist in his 40s dies after collision
A man has died following a collision between a van and a motorcycle. The crash occurred at about 08:20 BST on Wednesday near the HS2 site entrance on the A361 at Chipping Warden, Northamptonshire. It involved a white Ford Transit van and an orange Suzuki motorcycle. The rider, a man in his 40s, was pronounced dead at the scene, with police now appealing for witnesses. Follow Northamptonshire news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X. Man seriously injured while getting out of car Man in his 70s dies after crash at roundabout Northamptonshire Police
Bloomberg
34 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Farage's Reform Would Come Top in UK Election, YouGov Finds
By Updated on Save Nigel Farage's populist Reform UK would be the biggest party in parliament if the country held a general election today, according to a nationwide projection, underlining the political danger to Prime Minister Keir Starmer. Reform would win 271 of the 650 seats in the House of Commons, with Starmer's governing Labour party second on 178, polling firm YouGov said on Thursday. That would leave a hung parliament in which no party could govern alone.
