§ Mr. DjanoglyTo ask the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs how much has been spent on ineffective trials in(a) magistrates courts and (b) Crown courts in each year since 1997; and for what main reasons trials prove to be ineffective. [185374]
§ Mr. Leslie[holding answer 20 July 2004]: It is not possible to provide information in the form requested. The costs of an ineffective trial separately accrue to a number of agencies (the CPS, the police, the court, defence solicitors).
However, the Crown court over the last year has cut the Ineffective Trial Performance from 23.5 per cent. to 17.3 per cent. and the magistrates court Ineffective Trial Performance has reduced from 29.5 per cent. to 26.9 per cent.
There are 15 different categories recorded for a case being ineffective in the Crown court and 13 in the magistrates court.
The most used categories have remained the same since 1997, although the order and number fluctuates. The reasons below were taken from the most recent data set (rolling quarter ending May 2004) and have been listed in numerical order (highest first).
Crown
- Prosecution witness fails to attend
- Defendant failed to attend—Bench Warrant Issued
- Defendant not ready for trial—Further preparation needed
- Prosecution not ready for trial
- Defendant ill trial stood out (did not proceed)
Floater/backer not reached (the trial fails to go ahead on the day, a substitute trial may be available replace it)
Magistrates
- Prosecution witness absent
533W - Defendant absent—Did not attend
- Other
- Lack of court/magistrate availability
- Defence not ready
- Prosecution witness absent (police officer)