Best bar none

As the year limps to its end, it is time to reflect on the joys and sorrows of the last 12 months of the criminal justice system, and to hand out the Behind Bars Awards of 2009.

The first award did not trouble the judges too much: the SERCO administrators of Yarl's Wood detention centre won the 'Mean-Minded Grouch of the Year Award' by a mile. Canon James Rosenthal, a churchman and authority on Saint Nicholas, went to the immigration detention centre, in full Santa Claus outfit, to hand out Christmas presents to the 35 children of asylum seekers imprisoned there.

The fact they were unlikely to be Christian did not deter the generous man, but any other spirit of Christmas was notable by its absence. After the inevitable challenges and rudeness, SERCO called the police and the philanthropic churchman was escorted off the premises.

A disappointed Santa said: 'If this is how visitors are treated, I shudder to think what else transpires at Yarl's Wood.' We all shudder, but give that man a sherry and a mince pie and thank him for trying.

The 'Idea Whose Time has Come, No, Sorry, Idea Whose Time has Gone Again, Whoops, Our Mistake, Award' goes to the Titan Prisons. The Home Office wanted to solve the prison over-crowding crisis by building several enormous prisons housing 2,500 men each, complete with high-tech lock-up systems, on an American model with definite Benthamite undertones.

This lunatic proposal was greeted by howls of derision from everyone who knows anything about prisons: small local prisons which keep men near their families work best; vast warehouses full of technology and architectural dehumanisation work least. The idea has been quietly dropped.

The 'Victims at the Heart of Justice Award' goes to the charging lawyer in the case of Mason v DPP [2009] EWHC 2198. Mr Mason returned to his Land Rover after a night out, where he was accosted by a knife-wielding robber who relieved him of his car keys and drove off in his car. When he phoned the police, he was told to go to the police station to report it '“ and was promptly arrested for attempted drink driving. He was convicted, but argued successfully on an appeal by case stated that holding car keys for long enough to have them snatched from his hand was merely preparatory to driving and not enough of an attempt.

Mr Justice Nicol and Mr Justice Irwin who heard the case were hot contenders for the 'Spiffing Judge of the Year Award' as neither of them giggled, even once, during the hearing. And no, the robber was not apprehended and Mr Mason did not get his car back.

But the clear winner of the Spiffing Judge Award is HHJ Shorrock, sitting at Woolwich Crown Court, for his exercise in case management in CPS and C, M and H [2009] EWCA Crim 2614. The defendants were charged in the summer of 2008 with grievous bodily harm with intent and affray in a case where three different sets of CTTV evidence were crucial, not only for evidence at trial but for a dismissal application for one of the defendants.

A spiffing inspiration

The CPS were given extended time to produce and serve it '“ a deadline they missed. CCTV was not produced at the adjourned PCMH in May 2009 either, and the unfortunate prosecutor did not have the information to explain why.

The judge then ordered that the trial start there and then '“ as he has discretion to do so under part 1 of the CPR Rules 2005 which emphasises the overriding objective that criminal cases be dealt with justly, which includes dealing with them efficiently and expeditiously. Rule 3.5 of the same rules confirm the trial court's powers and duties to manage cases actively and to fix, postpone, bring forward, extend or cancel a hearing; and rule 3.6 recognises the need to reflect changing circumstances.

Obviously, the prosecutor was not in a position to go ahead, being as he was without witnesses. Everyone knew precisely what was happening in this case: a judge, driven to distraction by repeated failures to conduct cases competently, was flexing judicial muscles and throwing out a serious case to teach the CPS a lesson. But, in the course of this exercise, there were some truly fabulous exchanges between the prosecutor and the Spiffing Judge. This, after the judge had called for a jury:

'K: Your Honour, before you make that direction, may I invite the court to postpone this case for a short time '“

HHJ: No. Your application is refused.

K: '“ so that I can make some '“

HHJ: You want to go ahead, we will go ahead. Can I have a jury, please?'

Which was followed by this:

'HHJ: Again, Mr K, I accept readily I am forcing your hand. I am going to ask for a jury to be brought into court and this trial will start as soon as it has been sworn in. You will then have to offer no evidence. If you want to go elsewhere and complain about what I have done, you are more than welcome to do so.

K: Very well.

HHJ: Do you want a jury?'

The answer was no: and no evidence was offered there and then. The CPS did complain elsewhere, unsuccessfully appealing under section 58 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 against the terminating ruling. The Court of Appeal confirmed the judge had behaved entirely reasonably throughout. One hopes the Spiffing Judge will inspire others to bite, as well as bark.

There is also an award for Mr O'Connor of Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary, whose final report into G20 was published last month. It recommends strategy changes and reviews of policing tactics, and suggests that human rights principles be 'embedded' in their facilitation of peaceful protest. To him goes the 'It's a Good Start Award'.

And for Anne Owers, who is retiring from her post as inspector of prisons, there is no award but a sincere thank you for her independent, intelligent and effective work to improve life behind bars. And a happy Christmas to you all.