Categories
Civil Justice Criminal Justice Judiciary Legal Professionals

Watch UK Court Proceedings Online

Court Proceedings Videos

The latest cases in the Crown Court and Court of Appeal are available on the Sky News Courts YouTube channel. These videos are a real opportunity to see justice in action.

Section 41 of the Criminal Justice Act 1925 (CJA 1925) makes it an offence to take any photograph, make or attempt to make any portrait or sketch of a justice or a witness in, or a party to, any proceedings before the court, either in the courtroom or its precincts.

The Crimes and Courts Act 2013 allows the ban to be disapplied in certain circumstances by secondary legislation. For instance, the Court of Appeal and Competition Appeal Tribunal can broadcast proceedings. The Crown court can broadcast sentencing remarks. The Supreme Court is excluded from the two bans because cases heard by the UK’s highest court, which was established in 2009, would have previously been heard in the House of Lords where broadcasting was allowed.

See Photography in Court for more information.

High Profile Cases Videos

Lady Chief Justice gives judgment in the Court of Appeal – Shamima Begum
High Court Judge Mr Justice Goss imposed life sentences with whole-life orders – Lucy Letby

Latest Court Proceedings Videos

Please be advised that videos may contain graphic descriptions of serious crimes, including murder and sexual offences.

Jail for ex-cop who asked for intimate video of female suspect

A former police sergeant who asked a colleague to send him an intimate video of a suspect was jailed for four years.

Paul Street, 41, was sentenced at the Old Bailey ...after he was found guilty of two counts of misconduct in a public office following a trial.

The former Cambridgeshire Constabulary officer, who fostered a "toxic" WhatsApp culture among his team, appeared in television crime shows on the BBC and Channel 4, and was known for getting "impressive results" through his "robust" style.

Street, from Huntingdon, headed the southern Neighbourhood Impact Team from Cambourne police station in Cambridgeshire, mainly dealing with county lines drug supply and organised crime.

The officer, who quit the force in 2024, encouraged colleagues to bully a teenage detainee and asked a workmate to send him a sex video of a female suspect.

Anti-corruption officers uncovered Street's two WhatsApp groups in 2021 after a new officer reported him.

In messages investigators found on his phone, he encouraged using violence against the boy, 17, including "smash his little head in".

He also filmed and shared a video of himself using offensive language and making threats that were intended to be shown to the child.

He was convicted of MIPO for those actions and an incident where Street's colleague, PC Josh Williams, was accessing the contents of a suspected drug dealer's phone and told Street she was "quite fit".

The woman had warned the arresting officers that there were private, intimate photos on her phone because she wanted to ensure they were not shared.

In October 2020, Williams, 38, also from Huntingdon, messaged Street to tell him about the phone's content. Street asked Williams if there were "any nudes?".

The WhatsApp exchange indicated that Williams took a photo of the woman's camera roll showing numerous images of her in underwear and forwarded this to Street.

Williams also told him about an intimate video on the phone and, six months later, Street messaged Williams asking if he still had the video so he could "show the lads from footy", although there was no evidence the video was shared.

Williams, who was dismissed after pleading guilty to misconduct in a public office and was jailed for 16 months.

Street previously admitted two offences of unlawful disclosure of personal data.

Passing sentence, the Recorder of London, Judge Mark Lucraft KC, said many thousands of officers would be "utterly horrified" by the defendants' actions and attitude, which were "both appalling and inexplicable".

This video has been edited to remove extreme language.

The judge's sentencing remarks can be read in full at: https://www.judiciary.uk/judgments/r-v-paul-street-and-joshua-williams/

SUBSCRIBE to our YouTube channel for more videos: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCF3HqeLrCkZgARQfyqj1m-g?view_as=subscriber

Follow Sky News on Twitter: https://twitter.com/skynews and https://twitter.com/skynewsbreak

Like us on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/skynews

Follow us on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/skynews

For more content go to http://news.sky.com and download our apps:

Apple https://itunes.apple.com/gb/app/sky-news/id316391924?mt=8

Android https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.bskyb.skynews.android&hl=en_GBShow More
Jail for ex-cop who asked for intimate video of female suspect
Jail for ex-cop who asked for intimate video of female suspect
A former police sergeant who asked a colleague to send him an intimate ...
Honeytrap thieves jailed for killing men they had drugged
Honeytrap thieves jailed for killing men they had drugged
A couple who drugged men seeking sexual services in order to steal ...
Double killer and serial sex offender gets whole life order
Double killer and serial sex offender gets whole life order
A serial sex offender was handed a whole life order for the murder of ...
Jail for son who kept mum's body in freezer while collecting her benefits
Jail for son who kept mum's body in freezer while collecting her benefits
A man who kept his dead mother in a chest freezer in the living room ...
IN FULL: Disgraced funeral director jailed for 20 years
IN FULL: Disgraced funeral director jailed for 20 years
A funeral director who failed to bury or cremate people and gave ...
Whole life order for triple killer
Whole life order for triple killer
A triple killer who murdered and dismembered the bodies of two of his ...

Check out our related articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Lady Chief Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, Abuse of Process, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, McKenzie Friend, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?, Law Society, Law Commission, McKenzie Friend Right of Audience, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Judiciary

Recorder Annabel Darlow KC

Recorder Annabel Darlow KC

Annabel Charlotte Darlow KC, born on the 19th March 1970, is a highly respected figure in the British legal system, known for her exceptional advocacy, strategic brilliance, and extensive expertise in complex criminal and civil cases.

As a King’s Counsel (KC) since 2015 and a Recorder of the Crown Court since 2009, Darlow has built an illustrious career marked by high-profile cases, judicial appointments, and recognition as a leading silk in crime by both The Legal 500 and Chambers & Partners.

In court, Ms Annabel Darlow KC – The Honorary Recorder of Redbridge, should be addressed as “Your Honour.”

Annabel Darlow is apparently Security Cleared at the highest level.

Controversy

On the 5th August 2025, Annabel Darlow KC, sitting as a Recorder at Isleworth Crown Court, delivered sentence in a case involving racially aggravated harassment and threats to kill aboard a Virgin Atlantic flight from London Heathrow to Lahore. The defendant, Salman Iftikhar, a 37-year-old recruitment executive, was sentenced to just 15 months in prison for his actions.

On the 12th August 2025, The Rt Hon Chris Philp MP, as Shadow Home Secretary, referred Salman Iftikhar’s case to Attorney General Lord Hermer for review under the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme, following Iftikhar’s 15-month sentence for racially aggravated harassment and threats to kill on a Virgin Atlantic flight. He claims this is evidence of a two tier justice system.

Chris Philp Letter to Attorney General Lord Hermer Unduly Lenient Sentence Recorder Annabel Darlow KC

Legal Career

Annabel Darlow was called to the Bar (Middle Temple) in 1993 and quickly established herself as a formidable barrister at 6 King’s Bench Walk (6KBW) College Hill, one of the UK’s leading chambers.

Her practice spans a wide range of legal disciplines, with particular emphasis on homicide, terrorism, fraud, corporate advisory, confiscation and asset forfeiture, public and administrative law, and extradition. Her ability to navigate complex legal issues with precision and her reputation as a “forensic pugilist with brains” have earned her widespread acclaim.

Since taking silk in 2015, Darlow has been consistently recognised as a Leading Silk in Crime. The Legal 500 has praised her “understated advocacy style” as “very effective with judges and jurors alike,” while Chambers & Partners has lauded her as “a phenomenal cross-examiner” and “a very strong advocate” who “stands up to judges with confidence and clarity.” Her tactical ability, meticulous preparation, and spellbinding courtroom presence have made her a sought-after barrister for both prosecution and defense in high-stakes cases.

Annabel Darlow was appointed a Deputy High Court Judge in the King’s Bench Division under section 9(1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981 on the 1st April 2022.

Annabel Darlow’s CV is available to download at 6KBW.

Notable Cases

Recorder Annabel Darlow’s caseload reflects her versatility and depth of expertise. She has acted in numerous high-profile cases, many of which have set legal precedents or attracted significant public attention. Below are some highlights of her recent work:

  • Murder and Violent Crime: Darlow has successfully prosecuted and defended in murder, manslaughter, and attempted murder trials. Notable cases include R v Broughton and others ([2020] EWCA Crim 1093), an appellate case involving a death from a drug overdose at a music festival, and R v TN and others, where she prosecuted nine defendants charged with murder in a revenge attack linked to a county lines drug gang. Her expertise in contested medical and psychiatric evidence has been particularly noted in cases involving issues like diminished responsibility and self-defense.
  • Terrorism: Darlow has a long history of handling terrorism-related cases, covering groups such as the Provisional IRA, Al Qaeda, ISIS, and right-wing extremists. She prosecuted R v BZ, an Islamic extremist who plotted to behead a British soldier, and R v SW and others, involving right-wing extremists constructing a 3D-printed firearm for terrorist purposes. Her landmark case R v Kahar and others ([2016] EWCA Crim 568) helped establish sentencing guidelines for terrorism trials.
  • Fraud and Corporate Advisory: Darlow has been involved in major fraud cases, including the Serious Fraud Office’s (SFO) prosecution of Barclays Bank and its senior executives for fraud related to the 2008 financial crisis, described as a “blockbuster” trial. She also handled R v Kallakis and Williams, one of Britain’s largest mortgage fraud cases, and advised corporations like News International and Hewlett Packard/Autonomy in sensitive investigations.
  • Judicial Review and Human Rights: Darlow regularly acts in judicial review proceedings, including cases involving bail refusals and claims that the criminal courts charge breached defendants’ human rights. Her work in this area demonstrates her commitment to ensuring fairness in the legal process.

Companies House Appointments

Annabel Charlotte Darlow is listed as a Director of 2 Active Companies and 1 Dissolved Company.

6KBW NOMINEE LIMITED (07872677)
6KBW NOMINEE 2 LIMITED (07872709)
6 KING’S BENCH WALK LIMITED (07787605)

The three key values which are central to the role of judicial office holders (JOHs) in England and Wales are:
• Independence
• Impartiality
• Integrity

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Image of Recorder Annabel Darlow KC : 6KBW Copyright: Brian Lloyd Duckett 2017

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Judges Salaries and Fees, Dodgy Judges, Mr Justice Williams, His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC, His Honour Judge Richardson, His Honour Now His Dishonour, His Honour Judge Michael Slater, His Honour Judge Martin Davis, HHJ Farquhar, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Judiciary

Her Honour Judge Rosa Dean

Her Honour Judge Rosa Dean - Recorder of Redbridge

Her Honour Judge Rosa Mary Dean is a Senior Circuit Judge and the Resident Judge at Snaresbrook Crown Court in England.

HHJ Dean was appointed as a Senior Circuit Judge and Resident Judge at Snaresbrook Crown Court, effective 19th September 2022, by the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales at the time, the Right Honourable The Lord Burnett of Maldon.

Her Honour Judge Rosa Dean is also the Honorary Recorder of Redbridge, a ceremonial role that recognises her position as the senior judge at Snaresbrook Crown Court. 

HHJ Dean is the presiding judge in the case of Ricky Jones, a suspended Labour councillor charged with encouraging violent disorder.

Ricky Jones, aged 57, was charged by the CPS in connection to a speech he made on the 7th August 2024, in Walthamstow, where he allegedly made inflammatory remarks

“They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.”

On the 15th August 2025 the Labour councillor Ricky Jones who called for far-right protesters’ throats to be cut at an anti-racism rally was found not guilty of encouraging violent disorder.

Are Ricky Jones Comments Legal Now ?
HH Judge Rosa Dean Introduces Live Link Room

HHJ Dean Legal Bio

Her Honour Judge Dean was called to the Bar (Gray’s Inn) in 1994 and began her judicial career as a Deputy District Judge (Magistrates’ Court) in 2006, followed by appointments as a Recorder in 2009 and a Circuit Judge in 2011. She served as Resident Judge at Harrow Crown Court from 2017 before her appointment to Snaresbrook Crown Court in September 2022.

HHJ Dean is shown on the List of Circuit Judges published on the Courts and Tribunal Judiciary website.

Her Honour Judge Rosa Mary Dean London18-10-2011
List of Circuit Judges

Her Honour Judge Rosa Dean is shown on the Resident Judges list published on the Courts and Tribunal Judiciary website.

HHJ Dean attended Brighton & Hove High School from the age of 8 to 16 (1977 to 1985)

Her Honour Judge Rosa Dean is a Master of the Bench (commonly referred to as a Bencher) at Gray’s Inn. She was elected as a Master of the Bench at the Trinity 2015 Election.

As a senior member of the Inn, this role reflects her significant contributions to the legal profession and the governance of Gray’s Inn, which is one of the four Inns of Court in London.

Authorisation to sit as a High Court Judge

HHJ Dean may be authorised to sit as a High Court Judge by s9(1) of the Senior Courts Act as amended by the Crime and Courts Act 2013.

According to CRIMINAL PRACTICE DIRECTIONS 2015 DIVISION XII Her Honour Judge Dean should be addressed as “My Lady” in court.

Modes of Address B.1 – The following judges, when sitting in court, should be addressed as ‘My Lord’ or ‘My Lady’

(b) any Circuit Judge sitting as a judge of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) or the High Court under section 9(1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981;
(d) any Senior Circuit Judge who is an Honorary Recorder.

Description B.3 – In cause lists, forms and orders members of the judiciary should be described as follows:

(a) Circuit Judges, as ‘His [or Her] Honour Judge A’. When the judge is sitting as a judge of the High Court under section 9(1) of the Senior Courts Act 1981, the words ‘sitting as a judge of the High Court’ should be added;

Diversity and Community Relations Judge (DCRJ)

Her Honour Judge Dean is listed as a Diversity and Community Relations Judge (DCRJ), a role that involves promoting diversity and community engagement in the judicial system.

HHJ Dean covers the area around Snaresbrook Crown Court. She has also supported diversity efforts, such as assisting with visits from Diversity and Community Relations Magistrates at Harrow Crown Court. Additionally, her participation in events like the London Law Collective, where she delivered a keynote speech, highlights her role in inspiring diversity in the legal profession.

Diversity and Community Relations Judges across England and Wales undertake a huge amount of community engagement in a voluntary capacity. They also seek to encourage legal professionals from under-represented groups to consider a judicial career.

Diversity and Community Relations Judges – Courts and Tribunals Judiciary

The three key values which are central to the role of judicial office holders (JOHs) in England and Wales are:
• Independence
• Impartiality
• Integrity

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Image of HHJ Dean : You & Co

Check out our articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Judges Salaries and Fees, Dodgy Judges, Mr Justice Williams, His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC, His Honour Judge Richardson, His Honour Now His Dishonour, His Honour Judge Michael Slater, His Honour Judge Martin Davis, HHJ Farquhar, Do you Have to Bow to a Judge ?, Can you Email a Judge ?, Can you Criticise a Judge ? and the highly dubious Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Family Law Judiciary Law Legal Analysis Legal Professionals

HM Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS) Dishonest Coverup ?

HMCTS Coverup IT Bug

A serious IT glitch in the HM Courts & Tribunals Service (HMCTS) system in England and Wales has sparked allegations of a cover-up, raising concerns about the integrity of judicial rulings.

The software – known variously as Judicial Case Manager, MyHMCTS or CCD – is used to manage evidence and track cases before the courts. It is used by judges, lawyers, case workers and members of the public.

Courts service HMCTS ‘covered up’ IT bug that caused evidence to go missing – BBC

A leaked internal report revealed that a software flaw, present for several years before its discovery in 2023, caused critical evidence to go missing, be overwritten, or appear lost in civil, family, and tribunal courts.

This issue, which potentially affected thousands of cases, has led to accusations that HMCTS failed to act promptly or transparently, leaving judges to make rulings based on incomplete evidence. The scandal has drawn sharp criticism from legal experts and raised fears of widespread miscarriages of justice, particularly in sensitive family court cases involving child protection.

A briefing prepared for the chief executive of HMCTS (Nick Goodwin)- dated March 2024 – reveals the risk to proceedings was initially categorised as “high” with the possibility of court outcomes being adversely affected assessed as “very likely”, resulting in “severe reputational impact to HMCTS“.

Courts service HMCTS ‘covered up’ IT bug that caused evidence to go missing – BBC

Specific details about the development team or external contractors involved in the the case-management software, referred to as Judicial Case Manager, MyHMCTS, or Common Components Division (CCD)are not publicly disclosed or available.

Sources

HMCTS Bug and Coverup

The IT bug, embedded in software introduced in 2018, was not addressed until 2023, despite internal awareness of data loss issues. Sources within HMCTS, as reported by the BBC, claim that HMCTS did not inform judges or lawyers about the fault, even after it was identified.

One alarming instance highlighted in the report involved over 4,000 documents vanishing from hundreds of public family law cases, including those related to child protection.

The failure to disclose the issue has fuelled allegations of a deliberate cover-up, with one HMCTS source stating, “There is a culture of cover-ups. They’re not worried about risk to the public, they’re worried about people finding out about the risk to the public.”

The internal report, obtained by the BBC, revealed that HMCTS did not conduct a comprehensive investigation into the extent of the data corruption or its impact on case outcomes.

Of the 609 cases identified with potential issues, only 109 were selected for further review, with just one deemed to have a “potentially significant impact.”

Critics, including Sir James Munby, former President of the Family Division, have called the incident “shocking” and “a scandal,” arguing that the lack of a thorough investigation undermines trust in the judicial system. Munby emphasised that the absence of a formal legal review of affected cases makes it impossible to confidently assert that no miscarriages of justice occurred.

The software’s flawed design has also come under scrutiny. Sources described it as “not designed properly or robustly,” with a history of data loss that was inadequately addressed. This has led to broader concerns about the reliability of digital systems in critical public services.

The irony of HMCTS’s claim that its internal investigation found “no evidence” of affected case outcomes was not lost on commentators, with some, like a user on Singletrack World Magazine, noting the darkly humorous implication of an evidence-losing system finding no evidence of harm.

HMCTS has since stated that the IT bug was fixed in 2023, though specific details about the timeline of the fix or the measures taken to prevent future issues remain sparse. HMCTS maintains that its internal investigation found no significant impact on case outcomes, but this claim has been met with scepticism due to the limited scope of the review.

Miscarriage of Justice ? – Art of Law

Conclusion

The fallout from this scandal has broader implications for public trust in the UK’s judicial system. Social media platforms have seen users express dismay, with one stating, “There seems to be a chronic lack of accountability in the UK state at the moment. And if you can’t trust the courts, where do you even start?” The incident has also reignited discussions about the risks of over-reliance on digital infrastructure in critical sectors, particularly when systems are not rigorously tested or maintained.

Families and individuals affected by the data loss may face significant challenges in seeking justice. Researching Reform, a legal advocacy group, noted that many families had previously complained about missing evidence in their cases, suggesting that the IT bug may have contributed to wrongful rulings. As calls grow for a formal inquiry, the HMCTS scandal serves as a stark reminder of the need for transparency, accountability, and robust technological systems in the administration of justice.

The High Court Judge that never was – His Honour Judge Melbourne Inman KC !

Check out our related articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?, Law Society, Law Commission, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Free Speech Legal Analysis

The Free Speech Union

The Free Speech Union

The Free Speech Union (FSU) is a prominent advocate for freedom of expression in the UK, founded in 2020 by journalist Toby Young. He is a current member of the House of Lords and known as Lord Young of Acton.

It aims to protect individuals from censorship or retribution for expressing lawful opinions, especially in settings like workplaces and universities where cancel culture is seen as a growing concern.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. “This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.”

As of early 2025, the FSU boasts over 25,000 members, reflecting significant growth from previous years, and operates with a non-partisan, member-funded model.

As a member, you gain access to an array of resources and support, ensuring you can speak your mind without fear of being cancelled. Our experienced team provides guidance, support, and if necessary, discretionary legal support to defend your right to free speech. We will stand by our members, however unorthodox their views provided they’re not unlawful.

Join the Free Speech Union

The FSU has silver and gold membership with monthly or annual payments options.

Background and Mission of The Free Speech Union

The FSU emerged in response to growing concerns about the erosion of free expression in democratic societies, particularly amid rising instances of cancel culture and ideological conformity. It describes itself as a non-partisan, not-for-profit, member-funded organisation dedicated to defending the right to express lawful opinions without fear of censorship or retribution.

Its mission, as articulated on its official website, is to protect free speech as the “bedrock of all other freedoms,” especially in contexts like workplaces, universities, and public forums where dissent is increasingly penalised.

This mission is rooted in the belief that free speech enables the exchange of ideas, challenges orthodoxies, and fosters the pursuit of truth. Without it, the FSU argues, societies risk sliding into authoritarianism, where intellectual freedom is curtailed, and dissent is silenced.

Membership and Growth

As of January 23, 2025, the FSU announced on X that its membership had surpassed 25,000, marking a significant milestone. This represents more than a 100% increase from the 3rd January 2024, when membership stood at 12,151 reflecting rapid growth driven by heightened concerns over free speech restrictions.

Membership benefits include access to legal advice, representation, and advocacy for those facing repercussions for their speech, with an annual fee providing peace of mind for individuals worried about potential censorship.

Core Activities and Support

The FSU’s core function is providing practical support to its members, which includes legal referrals, crowdfunding for court costs, and public campaigns to raise awareness of free speech violations.

It has assisted over 2,000 people facing issues like job loss, academic sanctions, or social media backlash for expressing controversial but lawful opinions. Examples include supporting teachers sanctioned for questioning ideological teachings and workers penalised for political posts outside work.

Beyond individual cases, the FSU engages in broader advocacy, lobbying policymakers to strengthen legal protections for free expression.

It has been vocal in critiquing legislation like the UK’s Online Safety Act, arguing it could inadvertently restrict lawful speech under the guise of combating misinformation or harm.

Its newsletter and podcast further amplify its message, fostering a community dedicated to free thought and expression.

Criticisms and Counterarguments

The FSU’s approach has not been without controversy. Criticsargue that it sometimes defends individuals whose views are divisive or offensive, potentially amplifying harmful rhetoric.

They contend that the organisation’s focus on “free speech absolutism” overlooks the need to balance free expression with protections against hate speech or harassment.

The FSU counters that it does not endorse the views of those it defends, only their right to express them within the law. It emphasises that open debate, even on contentious issues, is essential for societal progress, arguing that suppressing speech risks driving harmful ideas underground where they fester unchallenged.

This stance reflects a broader philosophical debate about the limits of free expression, with the FSU positioning itself as a defender of intellectual resilience against cancel culture.

International Presence and Impact

The FSU’s influence extends beyond the UK, with a growing international presence including branches in New Zealand, Australia, Canada, South Africa, Switzerland, and efforts to establish new unions in other countries.

This global network, coordinated under the Free Speech Union International formed in early 2025, aims to defend free speech in international bodies like the UN and foster a culture of free expression worldwide.

Conclusion

The Free Speech Union stands as a vital advocate for free expression, with over 25,000 members and a robust suite of activities aimed at countering censorship and supporting individuals.

While it faces criticism for potentially amplifying divisive views, its emphasis on open debate and legal protections reflects a commitment to fostering a culture of intellectual resilience.

As debates over free speech continue to evolve, the FSU’s work remains relevant, ensuring diverse voices can be heard.

Check out our related articles on Policing by Consent, Thought Police, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?, Law Society, Law Commission, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Law Legal Analysis Police

Are the Police for Hire ?

Police for Hire

A chief officer of police may, at the request of any individual or entity, provide special police services at specific premises or within any locality in the force’s jurisdiction, subject to charges set by the police authority on a scale determined by that authority. So yes the Police are available for hire !

Police forces have historically recovered costs for “special police services”. These services include policing events like football matches, concerts, or private functions where organisers request additional police presence beyond standard public duties.

Drawing on key documents from UK Parliament, National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) and HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), this article explores the legal framework, implications, and controversies surrounding charging for police services.

Legislative Framework: The Foundation of Charging

The legal basis for charging for police services is rooted in Section 25 of the Police Act 1996 which allows police authorities to provide “special police services” at the request of any person, subject to payment. These services encompass additional policing beyond core public duties, such as securing commercial events like football matches, concerts, or private functions.

Section 26 of the Police Act 1996 applies similar requirements to the provision of police services overseas.

The 2008-09 UK Parliament report by the Home Affairs Committee details how this provision enables forces to recover costs for deploying officers, vehicles, and equipment.

Section 25, however, is not prescriptive about which events should incur charges or how fees should be calculated, leading to significant variation across forces. The Parliament report highlights cases where event organisers faced unexpected costs due to inconsistent application.

To address this, Section 15 of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011 later clarified the role of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) in overseeing charging policies, ensuring greater accountability.

NPCC Guidelines: Standardising the Approach

The NPCC’s National Policing Guidelines on Charging for Police Services aim to standardise practices across England and Wales. The guidelines categorise chargeable services into three types: special police services (e.g., policing commercial events like music festivals), mutual aid (where one force assists another), and additional services (e.g., training or consultancy for external organisations).

Charges are based on the full economic cost, including officer salaries, overtime, vehicles, and administrative overheads.

For example, policing a large-scale event like Glastonbury Festival could cost organisers tens of thousands of pounds, calculated by officer hours and resources deployed.

The guidelines emphasise transparency, requiring forces to publish charging rates and consult with event organisers in advance. They also allow exemptions for non-commercial events, such as charitable fundraisers, if they serve the public interest.

However, the discretion granted to individual forces can lead to inconsistencies. A small community group organising a charity run might face charges for road closures in one force area but not another, raising concerns about fairness.

Special Police Services Costs

As an example, in the Fees and Charges for the Supply of Goods & Services 2025 document published by Sussex Police, on page 14 they publish the costs for special police services.

  SurreySussex
Uniform and CID 2025 Rates Hourly RatesDaily RatesHourly RatesDaily Rates
  ££££
  Chief SuperintendentNORMAL165.911,202.85164.911,195.58
BANK HOLIDAYN/AN/AN/AN/A
BH < 8 days’ noticeN/AN/AN/AN/A
  SuperintendentNORMAL144.541,047.93143.541,040.66
BANK HOLIDAYN/AN/AN/AN/A
BH < 8 days’ noticeN/AN/AN/AN/A
  Chief InspectorNORMAL117.12849.08116.11841.81
BANK HOLIDAYN/AN/AN/AN/A
BH < 8 days’ noticeN/AN/AN/AN/A
  InspectorNORMAL110.47800.94109.47793.67
BANK HOLIDAYN/AN/AN/AN/A
BH < 8 days’ noticeN/AN/AN/AN/A
  SergeantNORMAL114.34828.99113.34821.72
BANK HOLIDAY139.541,011.65138.541,004.38
BH < 8 days’ notice181.841,318.36180.841,311.09
  ConstableNORMAL91.10660.4590.09653.18
BANK HOLIDAY111.33807.15110.33799.88
BH < 8 days’ notice143.721,041.93142.711,034.66
Charging of special policing services provided at commercial events

Please refer to the Fees and Charges for the Supply of Goods & Services 2025 for all fees and charges for special police services.

Sussex Police also publish an Income Generation and Charging Policy.

This policy is required to ensure there is a consistent and transparent method for calculating the appropriate fees for the use of police services and/or goods that are provided by Sussex Police to outside agencies so that the ‘users’ of the service have a clear understanding of how the charges have been calculated.

Income Generation and Charging Policy (490/2024) – Sussex Police

The amount of money Brighton and Hove Albion paid to Sussex Police for special police services from 2015 to 2024 was obtained via a Freedom of Information request by Richard Lemmer.

Further to a FOI request about the provision of Metropolitan Police officers under private hire arrangements such as those specified under S.25 of the Police Act 1996, The Met Police Published the response Private hire or provision of officers under special services provisions of Police Act 1996

Football clubs are currently only legally obliged to pay for the policing on their “footprint”, usually inside the stadium and surrounding car parks; the provision of “consequential policing” outside a football match, for example at a railway station or in the city centre, is currently the responsibility of the police and is provided at their discretion and at a cost to them.

The Cost of Policing Football Matches – Home Affairs Committee

HMRC and VAT

HMRC’s VATGPB5270 guidance clarifies the tax implications of charging for police services. Core policing duties, such as responding to emergencies or maintaining public order, are classified as non-business activities and exempt from VAT, reflecting their status as statutory obligations.

In contrast, special police services provided to commercial entities, such as policing a corporate event, are considered business activities and subject to VAT.

This ensures forces recover costs without generating profit. For example, a private company hiring police for a product launch would pay the full cost plus VAT, while a community event might qualify for an exemption if deemed non-commercial.

This distinction aligns with HMRC’s broader aim to balance fiscal responsibility with the principle that core policing remains a public good.

However, the complexity of determining which services are VAT-liable could create administrative burdens for forces, particularly when dealing with mixed-purpose events.

Implications and Controversies

The “police for hire” model, grounded in the Police Act 1996 and refined by the NPCC guidelines, reflects a pragmatic response to financial pressures. Yet, it raises profound questions about the nature of policing in a resource-constrained era.

Charging for police services has practical benefits but also significant drawbacks. Charging allows forces to prioritise public safety while recouping costs from those who directly benefit, such as commercial event organisers.

However, critics argue that this practice risks creating a two-tier policing system, where wealthier organisations or individuals can afford enhanced protection, while smaller groups struggle.

This raises ethical concerns about whether access to police services is being commodified, undermining the principle of policing by consent established by Sir Robert Peel. Moreover, inconsistent application of charges across forces can erode public trust.

The NPCC guidelines aim to mitigate this, but their reliance on local discretion leaves room for variation.

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Impartiality, Police Public Confidence and Engagement, Police Professional Standards Department, IOPC, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Thought Police, Police Digital Service, Knowledge Hub – Police Digital Service, What is the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC) ?, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Sussex Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Police

What is the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC) ?

National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC)

The National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC) is a UK national unit that supports police forces across the United Kingdom, Crown Dependencies, and British Overseas Territories by coordinating the deployment of police officers and staff during large-scale events, operations, and national crises, such as civil emergencies, major protests, or significant public events.

It ensures effective mobilisation of specialist resources and mutual aid across forces, maintains national capacity assessments for over 200 specialist skills, and provides strategic intelligence and briefing support, particularly for protest-related threats.

NPoCC also represents UK policing at government-level meetings, including the Civil Contingencies Committee (COBR), and supports operations like disaster victim identification and international policing efforts.

The unit is composed of officers and staff seconded from UK police forces, organised into two teams: Operations and Strategic Intelligence and Briefing (SIB). Assistant Chief Constable Mark Williams serves as the Strategic Lead and National Mobilisation Coordinator as of January 2025.

Location

NPoCC is based at 50 Broadway, London, SW1H 0BL. The National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC) shares the same building as the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC).

The office was officially opened in April 2024 by The Duke of Gloucester. The Duke of Gloucester was welcomed by NPCC Chair Chief Constable Gavin Stephens, and Assistant Chief Constable Mark Williams of the National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC). Also in attendance was the Rt Hon Chris Philp MP, who was the Minister for Crime, Policing and Fire.

It relocated to this site following a lease agreement approved in 2023, after previously being housed at 10 Victoria Street, London, under a temporary extension of occupancy. The relocation was funded by NPoCC and the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC), with no liability to the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC).

Relevant Legislation

NPoCC operates under the following legal frameworks:

  • Section 22A of the Police Act 1996: This legislation underpins the NPoCC’s operations through a collaboration agreement signed by Chief Constables, Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs), and non-Home Office force equivalents. It facilitates the funding and coordination of NPoCC by contributions from all UK police forces and enables the NPCC, which NPoCC reports to, to function as a national coordination body.
  • Public Contracts Regulations 2015 (revoked on 24 February 2025 by the Procurement Act 2023): For contracts exceeding £213,477, NPoCC’s procurement activities, such as those related to its relocation and fit-out costs, must comply with these regulations. The 2023 relocation to 50 Broadway adhered to these rules, using existing Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) frameworks for construction and design services.
  • Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011: This act defines the roles of Police and Crime Commissioners, who, along with MOPAC and the Common Council of the City of London, are part of the policing bodies contributing to NPoCC’s governance and funding.

Budget and Funding

The National Police Coordination Centre (NPoCC) does not have a publicly disclosed specific budget figure for 2025 in available records.

Its funding is derived from contributions by all UK police forces under a Section 22A Police Act 1996 collaboration agreement, managed through the National Police Chiefs’ Council (NPCC). The exact amount allocated to NPoCC is not itemised separately in public documents, as it forms part of broader NPCC and police funding streams.

For context, the overall police funding settlement for England and Wales in 2025-26 is up to £19.6 billion, an increase of £1.1 billion from 2024-25, with £17.5 billion allocated to Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) and including £1 billion for national policing priorities, which encompasses NPoCC’s operations.

However, the specific portion for NPoCC is not detailed, as its budget is embedded within these contributions and NPCC operational costs. Additional costs, such as the 2023 relocation to 50 Broadway, London, were covered by NPoCC and NPCC without liability to the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), indicating shared funding mechanisms.

Without precise figures, the NPoCC’s budget is likely a small fraction of the national priorities funding, tailored to support its coordination, intelligence, and mobilisation activities across UK forces.

Check out our articles on Policing by Consent, Police Impartiality, Are the Police for Hire ?, Police Surveillance, Police Public Confidence and Engagement, Police Professional Standards Department, Are the Police for Hire ?, IOPC, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Thought Police, Police Digital Service, Knowledge Hub – Police Digital Service, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Sussex Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Law Legal Analysis Police

Sussex Police and Brighton Pride 2025

Sussex Police and Brighton Pride

Brighton Pride, officially Brighton & Hove Pride, is often cited as the UK’s largest and most popular Pride festival, drawing significant crowds and generating substantial economic impact.

Sources indicate it attracts over 300,000 attendees, with some estimates as high as 500,000 over the Pride weekend, contributing around £30.5 million to the city’s economy. The event features a major parade, a festival in Preston Park, and various parties, making it a cornerstone of Brighton’s cultural calendar.

Pride On The Park supported by Hayu is the official Brighton & Hove Pride fundraiser for our local LGBTQIA+ community groups. A glittering and truly inclusive community celebration that delivers an unforgettable day of Pride, it is unique community fundraising event that has enjoyed amazing performances from international stars including Britney Spears, Kylie Minogue, Dua Lipa, Ray,  Nile Rogers & Chic, Clean Bandit, Pet Shop Boys, Grace Jones, Years and Years, Sister Sledge, Carly Rae Jepsen, Fatboy Slim, Paloma Faith, The Human League,  Ella Elre, Jessie J amongst others.

The UK’s Biggest LGBTQ Pride Festival – Brighton Pride

Brighton Pride this year is being held between the 2nd and 3rd August 2025. Mariah Carey is the headline act for Brighton & Hove Pride 2025, performing at Pride On The Park on Saturday 2nd August. The Sugababes will headline on Sunday 3rd August.

Should the NHS take part in Pride (LGBTQIA+) Events ?

Police and Impartiality at Pride

Mr Justice Linden in Smith v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [2025] EWHC 1805 (Admin) ruled that Northumbria Police breached their duty of impartiality by allowing uniformed officers to actively participate in the Newcastle Pride in the City 2024 event, displaying symbols like the Progress Pride flag.

The court found that such participation gave the impression of endorsing a contested ideological position—specifically, gender ideology—potentially undermining public trust in the police’s ability to act impartially, particularly in disputes involving gender-critical individuals and transgender rights supporters.

Sussex Police and Brighton Pride 2025

Sussex Police Media Team were contacted on the 31st July 2025. The Sussex Police’s responses are in bold :-

  1. Has the Chief Constable/Sussex Police decided if they will allow uniformed  officers to actively take part in Brighton Pride on the 2nd – 3rd AUGUST 2025 ?

A decision was taken in June that Sussex Police would not take part in the parade in 2025.

  1. Will the Sussex Police Pride Car and other Sussex Police vehicles have the PRIDE and other symbols removed ? 

We have a police vehicle which has LGBTQ+ inclusion livery. This is a response vehicle used all year round within the Brighton division. We cannot say at this point whether it will be operational at the weekend.

  1. Has any guidance been issued to officers in relation to PRIDE Brighton 2025 and other events ? For example,  Sussex police officers can only attend Brighton Pride 2025 events on a voluntary basis and not in uniform unless policing the event.

Sussex Police is not taking part in the parade this year.

Check out our articles on Sussex Police, Policing by Consent, Police Impartiality, Police Public Confidence and Engagement, Police Professional Standards Department, IOPC, Crime Reporting, What is a Police and Crime Commissioner ?, Policing, Police News, Two Tiered Policing, Are the Police for Hire ?, Thought Police, Police Digital Service, Knowledge Hub – Police Digital Service, Wasting Police Time, Police Community Support Officers (PCSO), Met Police, Chief Constable Jo Shiner, R v Sussex Justices and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Legal Analysis

Should the NHS take part in Pride (LGBTQIA+) Events ?

NHS and Pride

The judgment by Mr Justice Linden in Smith v Chief Constable of Northumbria Police [2025] EWHC 1805 (Admin) ruled that Northumbria Police breached their duty of impartiality by allowing uniformed officers to actively participate in the Newcastle Pride in the City 2024 event, displaying symbols like the Progress Pride flag.

The court found that such participation gave the impression of endorsing a contested ideological position specifically, gender ideology, potentially undermining public trust in the police’s ability to act impartially, particularly in disputes involving gender-critical individuals and transgender rights supporters.

This ruling has implications for other public bodies, like the NHS, which are also expected to maintain impartiality in their public-facing activities. The judgment suggests that public institutions should avoid actions that could be perceived as aligning with one side of a polarising debate, even under the guise of inclusivity.

For the NHS, this could mean reconsidering participation in Pride (LGBTQIA+) events if it involves official branding, uniformed staff, or symbols like the Progress Pride flag, which the court noted is associated with trans activism and may exclude those with gender-critical views.

However, the ruling does not outright ban participation in Pride events. It emphasises that public bodies must ensure their actions do not create a perception of bias. The NHS could still engage with Pride in a neutral capacity, such as providing health services or safety support, as long as it avoids endorsing specific ideological positions. For example, staffing informational stalls without Pride insignia or ensuring staff participate in a personal capacity (not in uniform or with official branding) could align with the impartiality requirement.

There are broader considerations. Some argue that Pride has become politicised, particularly with slogans and symbols tied to contested issues like transgender rights, which could complicate NHS involvement. Others contend that supporting Pride is about promoting inclusivity for marginalised groups, like the LGBT+ community, and withdrawing could harm community trust, especially among those who feel underserved by healthcare systems.

The judgment, however, prioritises impartiality over these community engagement goals, suggesting that public bodies must tread carefully to avoid legal challenges.

The NHS may wish to reassess its approach to Pride participation, ensuring any involvement is strictly neutral, avoids ideological symbols, and prioritises its core mission of equitable healthcare delivery. It’s worth noting that the ruling’s scope is specific to the police, and no direct legal precedent applies to the NHS yet, but the principle of impartiality likely extends to other public bodies.

The NHS might also consider public consultation or clear guidelines to balance inclusivity with neutrality, especially given the ruling’s broader implications for public institutions.

Ultimately, the decision depends on how the NHS interprets its impartiality obligations and whether it can engage with Pride in a way that doesn’t signal taking sides in ideological debates.

Check out our related articles on Can a Woman Have a Penis ?, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?, Law Society, Law Commission, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Categories
Law Legal Analysis

What is a Hung Jury ?

What is a Hung Jury

A hung jury refers to a situation in a criminal trial where the jury cannot reach a unanimous or majority verdict as required by law, resulting in a failure to deliver a conclusive decision on the defendant’s guilt or innocence.

Explanation of a Hung Jury

In England and Wales, juries in criminal trials typically consist of 12 jurors, though this number can reduce to as few as 9 due to illness or other exceptional circumstances.

For a verdict to be reached, the jury must either deliver a unanimous verdict (all jurors agree) or, after a minimum period of deliberation (usually at least two hours and ten minutes, as specified by the court), a majority verdict.

A majority verdict requires at least 10 jurors to agree (e.g., 10-2 or 11-1) when 12 jurors remain, or 9-1 if only 10 jurors remain, as outlined in the Juries Act 1974. A hung jury occurs when the jurors, even after extended deliberation, cannot achieve the required level of agreement. This deadlock means the jury is discharged by the judge without delivering a verdict, and the trial does not result in a conviction or acquittal.

Implications of a Hung Jury

When a jury is hung, the court typically discharges the jurors, and the case is referred back to the prosecution, usually the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS). The CPS then decides whether to pursue a retrial, based on factors such as the strength of the evidence, the seriousness of the offense, and the public interest.

According to CPS guidelines, a retrial is often sought if the prosecution believes a conviction is still likely and it serves the interests of justice CPS Retrial Guidance.

In some cases, if the evidence is weak or a retrial is deemed unlikely to succeed, the prosecution may choose not to proceed further, effectively halting the case. Alternatively, if a retrial is ordered, a new jury is empanelled, and the trial process begins anew, with the same or adjusted evidence presented.

Frequency and Causes of a Hung Jury

Hung juries are relatively rare in England and Wales due to the allowance of majority verdicts, which reduces the likelihood of deadlock compared to jurisdictions requiring unanimous verdicts.

Hung juries occur in a small percentage of cases, though exact figures vary year to year. Common reasons for a hung jury include conflicting evidence, complex legal issues, or differing juror perspectives on the case.

Legal Framework and Procedure

The process for handling juries, including hung juries, is governed by the Juries Act 1974 and supplemented by guidance in the Crown Court Compendium.

The Crown Court Compendium is a resource published by the Judicial College for judges presiding over criminal trials. The Compendium includes directions on jury management, such as how to handle deadlocked juries and when to give a “majority direction” or a “Watson direction” (based on R v Watson [1988] QB 650), which encourages jurors to reach a verdict without coercion.

Judges may provide additional directions to encourage jurors to reach a verdict, such as a “majority direction” after sufficient deliberation time, but they must avoid pressuring jurors unduly.

If a hung jury is declared, the judge discharges the jury, and the case is reviewed for further action. The Courts and Tribunals Service manages the procedural aspects of scheduling retrials or other proceedings.

In addition to the Juries Act 1974, which is the primary legislation governing jury composition, deliberations, and majority verdicts in England and Wales, other relevant legislation and legal frameworks may apply to the context of hung juries or related jury processes.

  • Criminal Justice Act 2003
    • This act introduced reforms to the criminal justice system, including provisions affecting jury trials. While it primarily focuses on evidence admissibility and sentencing, it also contains provisions that can influence retrials following a hung jury, such as rules on double jeopardy (Part 10, Sections 75–97). In rare cases, a hung jury in a serious offense may lead to a retrial under relaxed double jeopardy rules for certain offenses if new and compelling evidence emerges.
    • Relevance to Hung Juries: If a hung jury occurs and a retrial is pursued, the Criminal Justice Act 2003 may govern aspects of the retrial process, particularly for serious crimes.
  • Criminal Procedure Rules 2020
    • The Criminal Procedure Rules, issued by the Ministry of Justice, provide detailed procedural guidance for criminal trials, including jury management and the handling of hung juries. Part 25 of the Rules outlines procedures for trial conduct, including jury deliberations and what happens when a jury cannot reach a verdict.
    • Relevance to Hung Juries: These rules ensure that the court follows consistent procedures when discharging a hung jury and scheduling a retrial.
  • Contempt of Court Act 1981
    • This act regulates juror conduct and protects the integrity of jury deliberations. It prohibits jurors from disclosing details of their deliberations, which is relevant to hung juries as it ensures confidentiality even when a jury fails to reach a verdict. Breaches of this act (e.g., jurors researching cases online) can contribute to a hung jury or lead to a mistrial.
    • Relevance to Hung Juries: Misconduct by jurors, such as improper research or external influence, can result in a hung jury or jury discharge, governed by this legislation.
  • Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994
    • This act includes provisions related to jury tampering and juror intimidation (Sections 51–52), which can lead to a hung jury if jurors feel unable to deliberate freely. If tampering is suspected, the court may discharge the jury, effectively resulting in a hung jury scenario.
    • Relevance to Hung Juries: Ensures that external pressures do not improperly influence jury decisions, which could otherwise lead to a deadlock.

Impact on Defendants and Victims

A hung jury can be emotionally and financially taxing for all parties involved. Defendants may face prolonged uncertainty, while victims and witnesses may need to prepare for a retrial, potentially reliving traumatic experiences. The CPS considers these factors when deciding whether to pursue a retrial, balancing justice with practicality.

Conclusion

A hung jury in England and Wales represents a rare but significant outcome in criminal trials, reflecting the challenges of achieving consensus in complex cases.

Governed by clear legal frameworks like the Juries Act 1974 and CPS guidelines, the system ensures that hung juries are handled methodically, with retrials or case discontinuations decided in the interest of justice. For further information on jury processes or retrials, refer to the following resources:

Check out our related articles on What is a Jury ?, Rule of Law, Open Justice, Is the Law Black and White ?, What Does Lady Justice Symbolise ?, Can a Judge Direct a Jury to Find a Defendant Not Guilty ?,Law Society, Law Commission, Solicitors, Solicitors Regulation Authority, Barristers, Bar Council of England and Wales, Bar Standards Board, Contra Mundum, R v Sussex Justices, Police Impartiality and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

“Publicity is the very soul of justice. . . . It keeps the judge himself, while trying, under trial….Where there is no publicity there is no justice”

Jeremy Bentham – Mr Justice Cobb: ‘Justice must be seen to be done’

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent