1. Moving Towards Victim- Centred Criminal Trials November 2007 1 st North-East Conference on Sexual Violence Matthew Hall, University of Sheffield m.p.hall@sheffield.ac.uk

2. 2 Methodology Ethnographic observations of criminal trials at three criminal courts in the north of England. 2 Magistrates’ Courts and 1 Crown Court. Courts users’ survey at 1 Magistrates’ court (including victims and witnesses). Interviews with judiciary, practitioners, court staff, court administrators and central policy-makers. Collected documents about these groups. Attempted to developed an understanding of their culture. Wrote up a detailed account of this setting.

3. 3 Breakdown of empirical data: 247 Trials (112 effective) 42 Interviews 113 survey responses

4. 4 Proposed model of victim-centrality in criminal trials Practical centrality Cultural centrality Narrative centrality VICTIMS

5. 5 Practical Centrality Resources, facilities, processes. Effective Trial Management (Pre-Trial Reviews, Case Progression Officers etc.). Flexible listing and resource allocation at courts on the day of trials (not an economic argument). Keeping victims up to date – channels of communication. ‘Service rights’ (Ashworth, 2000) Avoiding ‘over-reform’ and promoting training?

6. 6 Cultural Centrality Occupational cultures, legal cultures, local cultures? Resources, facilities and processes are useless if not applied properly and with genuine understanding and enthusiasm (hence a triangle). Lawyers challenging delay and inefficiency rather than accepting delays as inevitable Domestic violence not seen as ‘unusual’ or ‘messy’ work. Advocates’ culture of eliciting evidence. Genuine belief in the importance of the victim to the process (and belief in victim rights?) Consultative participation.

7. 7 Narrative Centrality

8. 8 “People’s story-like constructions of events that include explanations, decapitations, predictions about relevant future events, and effective reaction” (Orbuch et al, 1994:250) ‘Account-Making’ Narrative Centrality

9. 9 “This confrontation is best accomplished by translating the chaotic swirl of traumatic ideation and feelings into coherent language” (Harber and Pennebaker 2002:360) Benefits of Account-Making

10. Narrative Centrality 10 “Subjects [homicide survivors] were very clear that coping is not recovering completely, returning to ‘normality’, or going back to the way they were before the murder. Instead, subjects referred to the ability to live their lives ‘around it’ and ‘go on’” (Kenney 2004:244) Benefits of Account-Making

11. Narrative Centrality Benefits of Account-Making 11 “[E]xpressing emotions about the assault; cognitively clarifying aspects of the assault; resolving some of the resultant anger, fear, and paralysis of action; and actually moving on with one’s life constructively” (Orbuch et al 1994:261)

12. Narrative Centrality 12 “We may regard the total information in a case as a ‘story’ concerning one or more criminal offences in which the reporting officers, defendants and witnesses express their findings and views, and which may contain contradictions and points which are unclear; this can result in different interpretations of one and the same file” (Van Duyne 1981:15) Stories in Criminal Trials

13. 13 Victims’ Narratives and Account- Making ‘at the heart’ of Criminal Justice 1)Bringing victims ‘to the heart’ of a system mainly characterised by stories = Bringing victims’ stories ‘to the heart’ of that system’ Bringing victims ‘to the heart’ of the system = Affording some benefit to victims participating in that system; which can be achieved though account-making

14. 14 Victims’ Narratives in Current Criminal Trials 1)Witness Statements 2)Victim Personal Statements 3)Giving evidence in court

15. 15 Victims’ Witness Statements  Purport to be victims’ own version of events  Look like stories  Not written by victims/witnesses themselves  Content may not be as witnesses envisaged  Written a.s.a.p. with no time for reflection  Written by police based on evidential criteria  Lawyers decide how they will be used

16. 16 Victims’ Personal Statements

17. 17

18. 18 Victims’ Personal Statements  Intended to be written in victims’ own words and own hand  Victims can make supplementary VPS statements at a later date  Low take-up rate  Confusion as to how they are given/taken  Restrictive interpretation by the courts  Lawyers still decide how they will be used

19. 19 Victims’ Evidence in Court  Their singular opportunity to present information first-hand  Lawyers control what they are allowed to say  Must be oral  Unnatural setting/language  Unfamiliar concepts (e.g. hearsay)  Intimidating/upsetting questions  Not necessarily voluntary

20. 20 Timeline of victim’s narrative T1 = time of victimisation T2 = time of giving witness statement T3 = time of giving evidence at trial T1T2 T3 Time

21. 21 Special Measures: The Way Forward for Victims’ Narratives? 1)Still largely based on orality principle and traditional evidential values. 2)BUT – free narrative phase afforded to child witnesses through pre-recorded examination in chief.

22. 22 Practical centrality Cultural centrality Narrative centrality VICTIMS

23. 23 “Internally-enforceable rights” Practical centrality Cultural centrality Narrative centrality VICTIMS

24. 24 Internally-Enforceable Rights? Rights, judicable from within the criminal justice process, enforced by judges. That is, rights to ensure the three forms of centrality are realised. Both positive and negative rights. Internally-enforceable rights means problems are dealt with immediately and that practitioners see them being enforced by judges  improved occupational cultures in relation to victims. But enforceability? Endless delays? Trials-within-trials? Appeals? Persuading the judges – Code of Judicial Ethics? Judicial Complaints?

25. 25 The wider criminal justice system? Practical centrality Cultural centrality Accounts centrality VICTIMS

26. Moving Towards Victim- Centred Criminal Trials Matthew Hall, University of Sheffield m.p.hall@sheffield.ac.uk November 2007 1 st North-East Conference on Sexual Violence