I guess it would be fair to say that in this country many would like to believe that being rich should not have an effect on the criminal justice process, but in truth it does of course. Take the very sad case of Hans Rausing, billionaire heir to the vast Tetra Pak fortune who found himself in court recently for frustrating the burial of his wife and driving under the influence of drugs.
Now it doesn't take an expert to quite quickly pick up that there is a drug addiction and mental health issue in this case and it should therefore be no great surprise that a psychiatric report was requested, in addition to a full Standard Delivery Report from the probation service. But I know from experience that it is getting much harder to obtain psychiatric reports in the criminal justice system, firstly because of the cost and secondly because the process 'delays justice'. It's even becoming difficult to get a full SDR rather than a cursory FDR in such cases.
In view of the fact that almost certainly Mr Rausing's defence was privately funded, I think it would be reasonable to assume that the report was paid for privately and not from the public purse. I also note that Mr Rausing was able to obtain bail by being accommodated at the Capio Nightingale hospital, a private mental health facility. Indeed when finally sentenced, a condition of his suspended sentence requires him to be treated at this facility on a residential basis.
Now as a professional I have no problem at all with the conduct or sensible outcome of this case, judged by publicly available information. My difficulty comes from the fact that none of it would have been possible if the defendant was of limited means and legally-aided.
I think the word ‘justice’ is one of the most misused in the dictionary, frequently meaning ‘getting the result I want,’ regardless of legal precedent, common sense and wider issues. I disagree with your comment on ‘class’ in the last blog; this is a maligned term, and better to use ‘those who have and those who have not,’ regardless of social class. I have seen respectable middle age people lost in the bear pit of court proceedings, whilst the working class frequent flyer knows how to manipulate the system for their own ends. There always those that will use every advantage they possess, whether it be money or experience, to achieve the best outcome.
ReplyDeleteAnyone who thinks that court proceedings are a level playing field with teams of professionals solemnly deliberating on life changing issues should go along to any court for a few mornings and see how it really works. You have police officers and PCSO’s that, because of the brilliance of social engineering projects, can define the Seven Pillars of Islam but not the meaning of burglary or any basic criminal offence. Seeing their written work and watching them give evidence is always a hoot since some can barely read and write. Defence solicitors who promise the earth, but obviously don’t have the skills to deal with anything other than common offences and lead their clients up the garden path. CPS representatives who have been given a course and are now ‘qualified’ to deal with everything, providing they all haven’t lost the papers, forgotten to warn witnesses and haven’t failed to complete the necessary inquiries. Local worthies who are only qualified in self importance and a curious desire ‘to help the community’ (and oh by the way give their ego a boost) by bringing totally undefined skills to a court room, will decide your future. (One of my local L/A’s has gone so far as to abandon the pretence of JP’s being in charge, and actually runs the court to his own specification, probably not least because he wants to go home at night.)
Sorry, but it is a shambles and isn’t going to get any better, though recruiting more professional magistrates is at least a step in the right direction. It is always a giggle to see the defence solicitor’s jaw drop when they find by accident, a professional magistrate sitting on their case. I have seen a few late changes of plea to guilty since they now work out that the wool is not going to be pulled over a qualified person’s eyes.
I have always resolved that if I fell in the **** the first thing I would do is employ a top class representative, probably a silk. Don’t bother with the ambulance chasers and the local solicitor operating out of a flat above the chip shop in the High Street. If I couldn’t elect jury trial, I would go for one adjournment after another until the opposition was a harassed CPS junior, a weak L/A and a team of the Local Bumblers who could be relied on to lose the issue half way through the case and be bamboozled. Justice? Of course not, but I shall have my way and that is what I would want.
By the way, good return to form
Chris.
"(One of my local L/A’s has gone so far as to abandon the pretence of JP’s being in charge, and actually runs the court to his own specification, probably not least because he wants to go home at night.)"
DeleteHe would get short shrift at my court. With your desire for District Judges[MC] not BTW professional magistrates, presiding alone over trials I suppose with your prejudices you can equate that to support for a jury system in some either way cases.
Jim
ReplyDeleteI'm interested to hear your viewpoint on the case of Sarah Catt
I was not aware of this case and note sentencing is adjourned pending a psychiatric report. I can only assume there is cause for concern and therefore requesting a medical report prior to sentencing is entirely appropriate.
DeleteWell, all this chap did was break some minor law regarding burying a body. Hardly likely to do it again. So why make a big fuss - serves no purpose.
ReplyDeleteGoing on a drug cure may or may not do any good. But as you say, if this chap had been some sad type at the bottom of the heap he would no doubt fall into the clutches of the prison and mental health systems, neither of which would do much good. The real issue is that this chap has the money to at least have a chance to turn his life around, the public purse gets asked to fund 1000s like him.