Truth, Efficiency, and Cooperation in Modern Criminal Justice

McEwan, Jenny

doi:10.1093/clp/cut001

Cited by 4 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This account – of remand decision making driven by time pressures, at the expense of quality – reflects broader concerns about criminal justice generally. Commentators have suggested that speed and economy have become increasingly important in the conduct of proceedings, due to both the post‐millennium focus on efficiency and post‐austerity reductions in funding (McEwan 2013; Welsh and Howard 2018), a combination of ideology and pragmatism. If one looks at all actors involved in the remand process (and the criminal process broadly) the potential effects can be noted, and a change (as described above) potentially explained.…”

Section: Findings Of the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Rushing Remand’? Pretrial Detention and Bail Decision Making in England and Wales

Smith

2020

Howard J Crime Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deprivation of liberty as part of the criminal process is always a significant step, and arguably even more so when the person so deprived has not yet been convicted of an offence. Remand decision making – that is, granting bail or requiring detention of a defendant prior to trial – in the courts of England and Wales is a common and important part of modern criminal procedure, yet has been under‐examined in the last two decades. This article presents some of the findings of the first empirical study of remand law and practice in this jurisdiction in many years. It concludes that, notwithstanding that the rate of pretrial detention is comparatively low and practice is broadly in line with domestic and regional standards, there remain significant issues – particularly in relation to the time spent on such decisions and the information provided to courts when considering remands on bail or in custody.

show abstract

Section: Findings Of the Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

‘Rushing Remand’? Pretrial Detention and Bail Decision Making in England and Wales

Smith

2020

Howard J Crime Justice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A difficulty emerges because of the potential loss of sentence discount for a guilty plea. McEwan states that prosecution evidence is frequently not available at the first instance (McEwan, 2013: 216). In Lawyer 002’s words:A fundamental problem with these forms is that you are expected to fill them in on the first occasion which is often when you have been given the evidence for the first time and had an opportunity to speak to the client for the first time.…”

Section: Active Case Management and Early Guilty Pleasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Already in 1994 McConville et al (1994) suggested that adversarial lawyers did not exist in reality and did not offer clients a zealous adversarial defence. More recently, McEwan (2011, 2013) claimed that the CrimPR weakened the adversarial nature of the criminal process in England and Wales. Further, Owusu-Bempah (2013, 2017) argues that forcing the defendant to participate in the criminal process fundamentally alters the adversarial framework and finally Quirk (2006, 2018) asserts that the changes made to the Right to Silence by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 paved the way for the dawn of the disclosure regime and was arguably the genesis of the new regime.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The adversarial defence lawyer: Myths, disclosure and efficiency—A contemporary analysis of the role in the era of the Criminal Procedure Rules

Johnston

2019

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article contends that piecemeal changes to the adversarial process since the dawn of the new millennium have transformed the CJS. The advent of (near) compulsory disclosure means the defendant has to reveal many elements of his defence. This dilutes the adversarial battle and leaves a process which is managerialist in nature. The Early Guilty Plea system is a mechanism to increase the efficiency by stemming the amount of cases reaching the trial stage. This has an impact on the defence lawyer’s role and renders him conflicted between advancing the best interest of the client against other pre-trial obligations. This small empirical study suggests that classic adversarial lawyers are seen as a relic of a bygone era. The modern criminal justice system prioritises speed and efficiency. If a case reaches court, the defendant is treated as an ‘informational resource’ of the court reminiscent of his position in the 17th century.

show abstract

“…The observation that criminal procedure is becoming less adversarial is not new. Academics, lawyers, and policy makers have been drawing attention to the dilution of adversarial ideals for nearly three decades (Hodgson, 2010;McEwan, 2011McEwan, , 2013Owusu-Bempah, 2013;Royal Commission on Criminal Justice Report, 1993). It is widely accepted that no pure form of procedural system exists in England or Wales, or anywhere else in the world (Royal Commission on Criminal Justice Report, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Getting people thinking and talking: An exploration of the Attorney General’s 2020 guidelines on disclosure

Griffiths

2022

The International Journal of Evidence & Proof

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article evaluates the recent Attorney General's Guidelines on disclosure in criminal cases. These Guidelines signal a further step away from adversarialism, towards an internally incoherent justice system which incorporates managerial characteristics, alongside increasing elements of inquisitorialism. Whilst still promoting the rhetoric of adversarialism, these changes have the potential to reconfigure the role of the suspect and the court in such a way as to circumvent the protections inherent in the adversarial system. This article considers two areas of the Guidelines, pre-charge engagement and the enforcement of a ‘thinking manner’ approach to the disclosure exercise. By considering these two expansive areas, a broader perspective of the Guidelines is taken in order to fully appreciate their significance. The impact of these newly minted Guidelines is not yet apparent, but this article postulates the potential longer-term ramifications of the changes and ultimately concludes that the Guidelines will result in further systemic incoherence which undermines suspect and defendant rights, and fundamentally reconstitutes courts as adjudicators of criminal investigations.

show abstract

Truth, Efficiency, and Cooperation in Modern Criminal Justice

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

‘Rushing Remand’? Pretrial Detention and Bail Decision Making in England and Wales

‘Rushing Remand’? Pretrial Detention and Bail Decision Making in England and Wales

The adversarial defence lawyer: Myths, disclosure and efficiency—A contemporary analysis of the role in the era of the Criminal Procedure Rules

Getting people thinking and talking: An exploration of the Attorney General’s 2020 guidelines on disclosure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About