Now accused won’t even have to turn up at court
Sheriffs may view video evidence
SUSPECTED criminals could be tried without even turning up in court, under radical proposals.
A hi-tech revolution is planned that would also lead to people accused of crimes being able to submit pleas and be sentenced online.
But yesterday it emerged another proposal would see suspects tried ‘in absence’ – meaning the trial would happen without them being present.
Instead the sheriff could review filmed evidence including eyewitnesses’ testimony gathered by police with bodyworn video cameras.
The plan comes after Scotland’s top judge this week raised the prospect of sheriffs being able to preside over cases remotely by video-link.
The changes are intended to make antiquated courts more efficient but critics are concerned they will overturn centuries of established legal practice.
Last night, Scottish Tory justice spokesman Liam Kerr said: ‘Courts are right to look at the use of technology. But it has to be shown to improve access to justice and make the system more efficient.
‘Any development that compromises that, or transparency in the system, should be resisted.’
The digital reforms could lead to concern about transparency, since online sentencing and pleas mean more cases would take place outwith open court.
At the moment, journalists can cover cases in court and the public can request details of their outcomes from sheriffs’ clerks, in keeping with the principle that justice must be seen to be done.
Officials who devised the latest proposals said details of cases – outcomes and even a summary of the evidence and pleas in mitigation – could simply be posted online.
But court bosses who staged a series of public ‘roadshows’ over the summer to gauge views on the strategy revealed concerns that having such details on the web could hinder rehabilitation and reveal confidential data.
The plans apply only to summary criminal courts, where sheriffs preside over trials with no juries.
In some circumstances, people already plead guilty by letter in less serious cases, but trials without the accused being present are unusual.
Reporting back on the results of the roadshows, a working party – which included court officials, lawyers and police – set up to examine the plans said: ‘More investigation should be done on this [trials with the accused not present] and a pilot conducted to assess the impact on attendance levels and subsequent appeals.’
The document does not discuss whether or not the accused would ‘tune in’ remotely to the proceedings.
Last night, advocate Niall McCluskey said there would have to be ‘massive investment’ in the schemes, and secure sharing of legal documents was crucial.
He added: ‘There are positive ideas behind it. I think the problem is ultimately that you create something that is a bit less “human”.’
Despite the concerns, court bosses said they were ‘convinced that the opportunities and enthusiasm exist to bring about substantial modernisation’.
A document setting out the findings yesterday said: ‘At several roadshows, points were raised regarding the publication of information online and the impact this could have on an individual since that information could be accessible in perpetuity.
‘It was suggested that online publication could have an adverse impact on the rehabilitation of offenders and could potentially deter some victims from reporting a crime for fear of intimidation.’
Defence solicitors, voluntary organisations, the judiciary, Crown Office and court staff and members of the public were asked for their views on the proposals at the roadshows.
On Tuesday, Lord Carloway, Scotland’s top judge, revealed an ‘experiment’ was already under way where sheriffs could preside over cases remotely by video-link.