*/
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.’
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier
