Appealing a conviction and sentence…

Welcome to Week 9 of the court visit breakdown!

Here is your backstory:

• The defendant had been charged with and convicted of harassment

• This case was an appeal against their conviction and sentence

So, the first thing I observed was what can happen when the defendant does not have counsel. I believe in this case the barrister was running slightly late, but did eventually arrive. However, the judge did explain to the court usher, that should the barrister not arrive, then we will have to find someone else within the law court building, that is able to take the case now instead. This gave me a really good insight into how life as a barrister can work, receiving clients and cases 1 minute before you are representing them in court.

Typically, when an Appeal of a sentence and conviction take place, it can be at the Court of Appeal or a Crown Court. Here the review will be completed in front of 2-3 judges rather than the usual 1. The outcome can be that the defendant has their conviction overturned, sentence reduced, no change to either or the sentence increased (only in Crown Court).

This case took place in the Crown Court, and at the top of the court sat the ‘main’ judge and two justices. Other than this difference, the case proceeded similar to a typical trial.

The first witness to be called to the stand was the defendant’s mother. She had been called by the prosecution and was the victim of the harassment. I was able to observe the use of special measures (a tool to ensure the comfort of intimidated or vulnerable witnesses when giving evidence). The victim made use of screens to remain hidden from the public and the defendant, and so they did not have to view the courtroom or the defendant either. During this evidence the prosecution made use of multiple CCTV clips of the defendant driving and stopping outside the victim’s house on numerous occasions, and then pulling away. The prosecution heavily relied on how each of these incidents made the victim feel, indicating that it caused her fear and distress, evidencing the harassment.

Now, this offence occurred during the end of 2023, a non-molestation order (a family court injunction that protects the victim from any abuse or harassment from a family member) had been given a few months after these incidents, and eventually it came to the courts. Therefore, it has been a fair few years since this offence. On this basis the victim did require a memory refresh. This allowed her to reread her statement from the time of the offence, to remind herself of what had happened when, and how it had affected her.

Subsequently, the defendant was called to the stand, by the defence. It was very interesting to see the difference in how people can give evidence. In this case, the victim very much relied on her original witness statement, and answering very precisely the questions given to her. Whereas the defendant attempted to recall everything that had happened throughout her life, that she felt was relevant to evidence anything negative the witness may have done previously, and to anyone involved in her family. This did not sit too well with the court, as on many occasions she was reminded to refrain from mentioning irrelevant things and to stick to all that was asked in the question. Additionally, they were told many times also, to stop addressing the judge and speaking in the courtroom. The judge explained that she must go through the barrister if something needed to be mentioned, or they will be removed from the court and the proceedings will continue without their presence (this was slightly entertaining in my opinion)

That was my observations for this week, it was very interesting to see the differences and similarities that an appeal has compared to a first-time trial.

Thanks for reading, see you next week!