*/
Video justice threatens defendants’ rights and undermines trust in the justice system, according to a report from a national charity that urged the government to delay further expansion until research has assessed its impact.
The research from Transform Justice found that appearing via videolink disadvantaged defendants, particularly those with disabilities or learning difficulties and those who do not speak English as a first language.
The report, Defendants on video – conveyor belt justice or a revolution in access? found that 58% of respondents thought appearing on video made it more difficult for defendants to understand what was going on or participate in hearings.
Seventy per cent said it was difficult to recognise whether someone on video had a disability and 74% said that those without legal representation were disadvantaged by appearing on video.
Transform Justice called for a halt to the expansion of videolink hearings until research has assessed its impact on juries, judges and defendants.
Its director, Penelope Gibbs, said: ‘Our report sounds a warning bell. If video justice disadvantages disabled people and risks undermining trust in the justice system, is it worth forging ahead with trial by Skype?’
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: ‘We know video hearings reduce court time, improve public safety and save money for the tax-payer. Videolink technology is used to make the court process easier for vulnerable victims and witnesses.’
Video justice threatens defendants’ rights and undermines trust in the justice system, according to a report from a national charity that urged the government to delay further expansion until research has assessed its impact.
The research from Transform Justice found that appearing via videolink disadvantaged defendants, particularly those with disabilities or learning difficulties and those who do not speak English as a first language.
The report, Defendants on video – conveyor belt justice or a revolution in access? found that 58% of respondents thought appearing on video made it more difficult for defendants to understand what was going on or participate in hearings.
Seventy per cent said it was difficult to recognise whether someone on video had a disability and 74% said that those without legal representation were disadvantaged by appearing on video.
Transform Justice called for a halt to the expansion of videolink hearings until research has assessed its impact on juries, judges and defendants.
Its director, Penelope Gibbs, said: ‘Our report sounds a warning bell. If video justice disadvantages disabled people and risks undermining trust in the justice system, is it worth forging ahead with trial by Skype?’
A Ministry of Justice spokesperson said: ‘We know video hearings reduce court time, improve public safety and save money for the tax-payer. Videolink technology is used to make the court process easier for vulnerable victims and witnesses.’
Signs of real change – more work to be done
Philip N Bristow explains how to unlock your aged debt to fund your tax in one easy step
With the property market witnessing significant changes since the beginning of the pandemic, Fleet Street Wealth’s Managing Director Julian Morgan considers the future of the home, the second home and the office
In partnership with the Bar Council, LexisNexis is offering up to 60% off its extensive webinar offering.
Chambers is expanding its team.
Making a move from the Bar to a career in governance: Maria Brookes outlines three good reasons to switch and how to do it
The pandemic and widespread introduction of remote hearings has been an interesting start to a career at the Bar: Lola-Rose Avery shares a day in her life
Bridging the Bar (BTB) is opening up the Bar to people from non-traditional backgrounds. BTB mentor, Laurence Cooper and his mentee, Jake Acock chat about the mentoring scheme
Your guide to making it as a NY attorney and practical issues for English barristers. By Teresa Rosen Peacocke and Alex Haines
Jason M Hadden's ultimate top ten of TV legal dramas
Politicians 'getting tough on crime' should note two pioneering, results-based, rehabilitative schemes in Durham and Hertfordshire which are slashing reoffending rates, write Tori Adams andSin Beaven
