Double Shift Sittings
Twice The Trouble Or Second Helpings?
By Sarah Forshaw QC
On 23 June 2010, a double shift sittings pilot scheme went live at Croydon Crown Court. It is, we are told, an HMCS initiative to increase capacity and so improve ‘court timeliness’ by doubling the use of courtrooms currently available. The pilot is set to run for 6 months in two courtrooms at Croydon (Courts 3 and 5). An earlier plan to introduce the pilot concurrently at Blackfriars Crown Court was postponed pending evaluation of the Croydon experiment. The court sits from 9am to 1.30pm for the morning session with one case (or a series of short hearings) and then from 2pm to 6.30pm for the afternoon session (different judge/different case[s]). There is a mid-session 20-minute break.
Who is overseeing it?
At Project Board meeting level, HMCS has roped in representatives from just about every interested party, including the prison service, SERCO, CPS, defence solicitors, probation, victim support, CJB, the judiciary (Bean J, Presider) and the Bar (Stephen Leslie QC; oh, and muggins). HHJ Warwick McKinnon (resident judge at Croydon) is the man on the ground, keeping a quiet, sensible steer on things. There is a ‘Local Implementation Team’ on which John Black QC sits. Feedback either to him or to me is welcome. We shall be sure to pass it on.
Has the Circuit been supporting the initiative?
Not as such. The pilot was introduced in an attempt to clear delays and maximise use of each courtroom. Naturally, that objective is fully supported by the Bar. Double shift sitting as a mechanism for tackling it was going to be tried anyway. The most hardened cynic would probably agree that we are better to be involved, to feed back experiences (good or bad) from the Bar and point out problems as we see them, i.e. To have some constructive input rather than to dismiss it out of hand. Some recognise possible up-sides for the Bar, leaving aside any potential for reducing delay / backlog within the criminal justice system:
• With clever clerking and a dollop of luck, it is possible that the industrious could find themselves working both shifts. Not to be dismissed lightly given the current situation at the criminal bar.
• An early finish or a late start is attractive to some.
• If there is a cost saving to be made within the criminal justice system through any route other than yet further swingeing cuts in legal aid fees (and we have yet to see from the evaluation whether the DSS scheme may help in that regard), then let’s consider it.
Initial Feedback: Brainwave or Barmy?
It depends who you talk to. A mid-way evaluation has been timetabled for the end of this month. From an administrative point of view, the very early stages of the pilot do not seem to have thrown up any showstoppers. However, a useful ‘Comments Book’ was left in the Croydon Mess to encourage feedback from the Bar. Bald, one-word entries, while amusing, cannot be repeated here, but it would be fair to say that the pilot has proved controversial. Of course it must be observed that an invitation to comment generally promotes criticism from those who feel strongly enough to contribute rather than positive feedback from those who do not. But it is noteworthy that the written comments have been, in all but one entry, negative. More formal evaluation forms have now been introduced. Counsel in SS cases are encouraged to complete them.
Recurring themes centre around delay (particularly where a defendant in custody is brought not from Highdown but from some other prison not in the loop), interference with family life (childcare issues), facilities (cafeteria opening times – although now coffee-making facilities have been provided in the robing room) and problems with communication once an afternoon sitting comes to an end at 6.30pm (securing work for the next day where a case goes short late in the evening/speaking to instructing solicitors who have already left the office/time in the cells with lay clients convicted at the eleventh hour, etc).
A document summarising all feedback received from the Bar so far has gone to the Project Board. The views of those at the coalface will be taken into account.
The Future?
Too early to say. Is it popular? Overall, probably not. Does it work efficiently in enough cases to create any real extra sitting time? Someone is working on the records as we speak. Even if the final evaluation concludes that the scheme broadly does eek more sitting time out of a court room, it is not suggested that the double shift sittings scheme should become the norm in every metropolitan court, or that it is suitable for every case. On one thing I suspect we can all agree: Croydon Crown Court at 6.30pm on a Friday night is not the longest of straws.