(Same review as I left on Amazon)
As with other reviewers, I have already read The Secret Barrister and found their attitude towards magistrates and the CPS as arrogant, insulting and rude. Whoever this person is seems to wallow in the belief they are the only qualified person and the only one worth listening to.
This being an example of text from their site:
If there is one positive to be derived from the Criminal Courts Charge (about which see here), it is that the creeping media attention is starting to shine a low-wattage torch on the grubby underside of the criminal justice system – the magistrates’ courts. Enormous credit must be extended to Frances Crook and colleagues at…
With this in mind, I noticed on Twitter that there was now a Secret Magistrate and a book of the same name so I bought it out of curiosity. Rightly so, this magistrate started their book by responding to the slating given by the SB.
It would be a lie if I as a member of public had experienced a magistrates’ court as a layperson or criminal as I have not but I have in my line of work. Prosecutors struggle with workloads, last minute cases, piles of them too. The defence I deal with are always prepared, usually have one case to deal with and many more advantages to boot.
The magistrates are obviously going to see the prosecutor as ‘ill prepared’ and as expected, the book indicates this is indeed the case. However, this book has also given an insight to much more than this and thankfully, magistrates do see the situation for what it is. It is grossly unfair to say that they are ‘naive and out of touch’ or ‘being unrepresentative of those they judge’ as the SB states. They see the reality of cuts, under-resourcing, poor IT and so on.
The book goes through a large number of cases, individually, and in enough detail to give an indication of the diversity of work they have to undertake, the decision making based on guidelines that need a translator to dissect, plus the number of constant changes they have to keep up with including costs etc. This is something other professionals probably had no idea about as it is often assumed there is a pro-forma already prepared on their computers to work the figures out.
People also do not realise; this is all voluntary.
They have to dedicate days for court attendance, days for training and other commitments so how on earth could someone in full-time employment dedicate any time to this whether self-employed or not? It is therefore inevitable that most magistrates are those who have retired. In my mind, what of it? At least they have seen, experienced and educated themselves with the university of life.
The training may be ‘inadequate’ as SB also keenly points out but is that the fault of the magistrate? This book would say to me, no, absolutely it is not. Also in their defence, I think judging (excuse the pun) by the book’s attention to explain decision making in each case and guidance by peers and legal advisors, they do a pretty good considering they have had so little training.
One thing that struck me is their absolute fairness. Before reading the book, this was going to be my criticism of magistrates that they come across as being too fair at times, borderline lenient. Their motto … ‘fear and favour’ is always in my mind when defendants manage to avoid conviction after a lot of work has been put into a case by police officers but if all magistrates are similar in attitude to this writer, then I can now see the limitations they are bound by.
Towards the end the writer does ask a question and in doing so consults a legal advisor too about the leniency shown towards knife crime for offenders who have no previous history and of good character. The question was whether they had in fact been too lenient. The writer then leaves the court and walks down the road looking back at the building wondering about its future. I was almost expecting the line to be that this magistrate was walking down the road ‘in fear of meeting someone wielding a knife’!
Ultimately, this is a well written book, it is a fair and detailed explanation of the role of magistrates, their frustrations and limitations. Has the book changed my opinion of magistrates, yes it has. Not just because I would happily disagree with the SB anyway who I consider a pompous a.s but because the book has given us all an insight that we never had before. The word ‘insight’ has been used a lot in reviews and comments on this book so doesn’t that tell us something, that until now, a magistrate was a bit of a mystery?
If I knew this Secret Magistrate, I would thank them for the book and for what they do but as I cannot, I will be buying a copy or two for my legal colleagues in the hope their attitudes to magistrates will change, as has mine. To you SM, thank you.