Speaking up for Witnesses
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SPEAKING UP FOR JUSTICE Report of the Interdepartmental Working Group on the treatment of Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System June 1998 Speaking up for Justice Report of the Interdepartmental Working Group on the treatment of Vulnerable or Intimidated Witnesses in the Criminal Justice System CONTENTS Chapter 1: Introduction 1 Chapter 2: Summary of Recommendations 5 Chapter 3: Definition 19 Chapter 4: Witness Intimidation 25 Chapter 5: Vulnerable Witnesses 37 Chapter 6: Further Investigative and Pre-Trial Measures 41 Chapter 7: Court Procedures 47 Chapter 8: Court Measures 49 Chapter 9: Further Measures in Relation to Rape and Other Serious Offences 61 Chapter 10: Child Witnesses 79 Chapter 11: Admissibility of Evidence and Alternative Forms of Evidence 85 Chapter 12: Training 93 Chapter 13: Costs 97 Annex A: Literature Review 99 Acknowledgements 102 Summary 103 Section 1: Introduction 105 Background 105 Definitions 105 Report scope and structure 108 Section 2: Witness intimidation 111 The problem 111 The response 119 Conclusion 127 Section 3: Disabilities and illnesses 131 The problem 131 The response 135 Conclusion 147 Section 4: Special offences 151 The problem 151 The response 167 Conclusion 193 Section 5: Conclusion 195 Bibliography 201 Annex B: Summary of Responses to Working Party 209 Annex C: Summary of Recommended Local Service Level Agreements; Inter-agency Working and Guidance 233 Annex D: CAPE Scheme 237 Annex E: Salford Witness Support Service 240 Annex F: Role of the Crown Prosecution Service 254 Annex G: Crown Court Witness Service 258 Annex H: Magistrates’ Courts Witness Service 262 Annex J: Child Evidence Issues 265 Chapter 1: Introduction Chapter 1: Introduction Background Oxford University, and their report was completed in 1996.2 1.1 The Labour Party manifesto stated that “greater protection will be provided for victims in 1.5 A further area concerns witness intimidation. rape and serious sexual offence trials and for those This is recognised as a growing problem, subject to intimidation including witnesses”. particularly on large housing estates, and is likely to affect both crime reporting as well as making 1.2 This commitment arose from concerns that some witnesses unwilling to give evidence in while measures are in place to assist child court. This was the subject of a Home Office witnesses, many adult victims and witnesses find research study by Warwick Maynard, a member of the criminal justice process daunting and stressful, the Police Research Group, who published a particularly those who are vulnerable because of report in August 1994, “Witness Intimidation personal circumstances, including their Strategies for Prevention”3. In response to growing relationship to the defendant or because of the concerns about this problem, the Association of nature of certain serious crimes, such as rape. Chief Police Officers, (ACPO), Crime Committee Some witnesses are not always regarded as capable took witness intimidation as one of its themes for of giving evidence and so can be denied access to 1997. During the past year, national guidance on justice. Others are in fear of intimidation, which measures to deal with witness intimidation has can result in either failure to report offences in the been developed which has now been endorsed by first instance, or a refusal to give evidence in ACPO Crime Committee. court. 1.6 To take forward the manifesto commitment 1.3 In 1996, media reports of the Ralston Jack Straw MP, the Home Secretary, announced Edwards rape trial drew attention to the trauma on 13 June 1997 that he was establishing an experienced by rape victims when the defendant is interdepartmental working group to undertake a not legally represented and so is able to cross- wide-ranging review. examine his alleged victims. In 1997, the reporting of another case highlighted the problems relating to disabled witnesses with Terms of reference communication difficulties when seeking to give evidence in court. 1.7 The Government gave the working group the following terms of reference: 1.4 Another area of concern relates to people with learning disabilities. The 1989 report1 of the • Having regard to the interests of justice: the Advisory Group on Video Evidence chaired by importance of preventing and detecting Judge Pigot recommended that once the crime, the needs of witnesses and cost recommended changes to the child evidence effectiveness, measures had been introduced, those should be extended to adult vulnerable witnesses, at the discretion of the court. (Pigot recommendations 9-11). As a follow up to these recommendations, the Home Office commissioned research into witnesses with learning disabilities. This was carried out by Andrew Sanders and a team from 2 Sanders A, Creaton J, Bird S, and Webster L, (1996) ‘Witnesses With Learning Disabilities - A Report to the Home Office’ Unpublished. 3 Maynard, W (1994) Witness Intimidation Strategies for 1 (1989) Report of the Advisory Group on Video Evidence: Prevention Police Research Group Crime Detection and London: Home Office Prevention Series Paper 55, London: Home Office 1 Chapter 1: Introduction • and taking into account the National needed to be addressed, both from existing Standards of Witness Care in England and research and also from interested organisations Wales and individuals. To this end, the Working Group commissioned a Literature Review which was • to identify measures at all stages of the conducted by Robin Elliott from the Home criminal justice process which will improve Office Research and Statistics Directorate, and a the treatment of vulnerable witnesses, member of the Working Group. Her report is including those likely to be subject to attached at Annex A to this report, and covers intimidation; developments both in the United Kingdom and overseas. • to encourage such witnesses to give evidence of crime and enabling them to give best 1.11 The Working Group also wrote to 84 evidence in court; individuals and organisations inviting them to submit written comments to the Group. • to consider which witnesses should be Approximately 50 responses were received and a classified as vulnerable; summary of these is attached at Annex B. • to identify effective procedures for applying 1.12 In order to test out some of the ideas being appropriate measures in individual cases; considered by the Working Group, the Home Office Special Conferences Unit organised two • and to make costed recommendations. criminal justice conferences. These were held in Chester on 18/19 November, and Cheltenham on 1.8 A parallel Group was established in Scotland, 1/2 December 1997. Members of the judiciary, chaired by the Scottish Office, to examine these the legal profession, the magistracy, and a wide issues in the context of Scottish law, procedure range of non-governmental organisations were and practice. able to discuss with members of the Working Group some of the more difficult issues that the Group was seeking to address. The Working Membership Group found this to be an extremely valuable exercise which greatly assisted their work. 1.9 The Working Group, was chaired by the Home Office with representation from the Crown Prosecution Service, Department of the General principles Environment, Transport and the Regions, the Department of Health, Legal Secretariat to the 1.13 The terms of reference do not distinguish Law Officers, Lord Chancellor’s Department, the between prosecution and defence witnesses. Department of Social Security (Women’s Unit), Therefore, the Working Group’s considerations the Northern Ireland Office, the Northern Ireland covered both and the remainder of this report DPP’s Office, Local Government Association, should be read on the basis that the term witness Victim Support and the Association of Chief refers to both. Police Officers. Representatives of the Scottish Group, from the Crown Office and the Scottish 1.14 The review was also required to have regard Courts Service, provided a link between the two to the interests of justice. Thus, when developing Groups and a channel for the exchange of its proposals, the Working Group was mindful of information and ideas. the need to balance the rights of the defendant to a fair trial against the needs of the witness not to be traumatised or intimidated by the criminal The work of the group justice process. When developing specific proposals, the Working Group also took account 1.10 The Working Group met for the first time of the United Kingdom’s obligations under the on 1 August 1997, and on approximately a European Convention on Human Rights. monthly basis thereafter until March 1998. The Working Group, recognising that its remit was 1.15 The terms of reference also required the very wide, considered that it was important to Working Group to take into account the National seek information and views on the issues that Standards of Witness Care in England and Wales. 2 Chapter 1: Introduction These were developed in 1996 by the Trials Issues 1.17 The National Standards apply to all witnesses Group which is an inter-agency group with a co- including those who are defined as vulnerable or ordinating role in taking forward criminal justice intimidated, whether they are specifically policies and initiatives. Local Trials Issues Groups mentioned as such in a particular Standard or not. are now implementing the National Standards in There are, however, a number of National the form of Local Service Level Agreements in Standards which refer in terms to the needs of which each agency