16-05-2025
First-time offenders may lose right to jury trial, minister hints
People accused of lower level crimes such as shoplifting and drug possession for the first time could lose their right to being tried by a jury, a justice minister has indicated.
Sarah Sackman, the courts minister, said it was a 'big question' being considered by the Government's independent review of the criminal courts whether such first-time offenders should continue to have a right to jury trial.
The review, headed by Sir Brian Leveson, the High Court judge, is expected to recommend that all people accused of offences such as some thefts, drug possession and assaults will no longer be able to opt for a jury trial as part of a 'once-in-a-generation' shake up of the court system to reduce record backlogs and delays.
But he is under pressure to allow some exceptions for those accused of a first offence who might, for example, have simply forgotten to pay for a shopping item but would be denied the chance to try to clear their names in front of a jury of their peers – with the consequences of a conviction potentially career-ending.
'That's going to be a big question for Sir Brian,' said Ms Sackman, who suggested that any defendant would – and should – get a fair trial irrespective of whether it was before a jury in a Crown Court or magistrates.
'Ultimately, the duty of the state is to ensure a fair trial, and there is no evidence to suggest that when it comes either to rates of conviction, or in terms of sentencing practice, any differential between the magistrates or the sorts of justice one gets in the Crown Court,' she told Joshua Rozenberg, a solicitor and leading legal commentator, on his podcast, A Lawyer Talks.
'There actually ought to not to be any differential in terms of the quality of the justice that that individual receives, whether that's in the magistracy or in front of the Crown Court, and indeed, for that individual, quick resolution, getting an outcome is actually the real prize.
'Because where cases are taking two or three years to come to court and having knock-on effects for the trial of other crimes such as rape or murder, that truly, in my view, becomes corrosive of the fairness of our entire justice process.'
Ms Mahmood has commissioned Sir Brian to review ways in which defendants' rights to jury trials could be scaled back without undermining fair justice.
This could see magistrates hearing more serious cases, some defendants losing the right to ask for their case to be tried before a jury and the creation of a new intermediate court, which would replace a jury with one judge and two magistrates.
The right to a jury trial extends back to the 13th century, and ministers are adamant that serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter, sexual assaults – including rape – assault causing grievous bodily harm, aggravated burglary and arson with intent will still be tried before their peers in crown court.
Ms Sackman also suggested there could be judge-only trials for complex fraud cases, regulatory and environment crimes where there are large amounts of expert evidence. 'All options are on the table,' said Ms Sackman. 'We'll have to see if Sir Brian regards any of those as suitable candidates for a judge trial.'
She said the current backlog – where, for example, rape victims were waiting two to three years for justice – was unsustainable. 'The old maxim that justice delayed is justice denied, rings true in this case,' she said.
'What we're talking about here is, how do we get swifter justice for victims, better value for the taxpayer, and indeed, for those who are accused of a crime that they may not have committed, ensuring that they're not prolonged in that state of limbo.
'The reclassification of offences would mean taking a cohort of cases out of the Crown Court into the magistrates where they'd be tried as summary only offences. To give you some context, some 90 per cent of cases are currently tried without a jury in the magistrates' court.'
She added: 'When people are waiting for years for their day in court, for justice to be done, that ultimately deprives that person of a fair trial. And it's not just unfair to the individual, it's actually corrosive of our entire system and confidence.'
