Nurse murdered seven babies

[Pale Rider]

Have a camera, screen and speakers fitted to the holding cell. (Partial) job done.

It would be.

Sentences already take place via videolink to the prison.

In that instance the prisoner is sitting in a booth, rather than his own cell.

Not being in the court room has an adverse effect on the dignity of the proceedings.

The judge has no control over the jail, so you get 'noises off' or a screw wandering past carrying his lunchbox.

The judge can tell the prisoner over the link to sit up straight or pay attention, but the words have a lot less power than if spoken directly.

Prisoners in the dock must stand, at least for the last minute or so of the sentencing remarks, and nearly all comply when under the direct, steely gaze of a proper judge.

 

[Mr Celine]

Letby is due to be sentenced on Monday so it looks like a straight lock-up in a women's prison.

Worth bearing in mind the standard for insanity is higher in the criminal justice than in the general population.

The court accepts that for some crimes the defendant must be a bit mad to commit them, but that's not enough of itself for a psychiatric disposal.

The way Letby has conducted herself during the trial suggests that, for criminal purposes, she is Captain Sensible.

Looks like she is going to refuse to appear be sentenced, which also won't go down well with the public but makes little difference to the exercise itself.

Her barrister will still be invited to say a few words on her behalf, but in light of the verdicts, there's not a lot he can say.

No one stays in court cells overnight, so Letby won't even be in the building, let alone the dock.

There's currently no legal way to force a remand prisoner to appear in court, but after a handful of higher profile non-appearances for sentence, there is a slow burning campaign to make it compulsory for a prisoner to appear.

After you put this in the gender thread I was composing a reply congratulating you on scoop of the year.


Instead I'll just say well done on a speedy deletion.

 

[winjim]

The punishment is deprivation of liberty, not public humiliation.

 

[BoldonLad]

Attention grabbing politicos and their friends in the right wing media are the cohort driving this.

Short of gagging them (convicted defendants that is) and putting them in a straightjacket how might this actually be done?

I thought it was been driven via a campaign by the mother of the child murdered in Liverpool?

I agree, it is impractical, and, I don't see that video links to Prison Cell actually "solves" the problem, presumably, it is the Victim's family, friends etc who wish to witness the Prisoner "getting what they deserve", and, seeing it on a TV screen is not quite the same as in the flesh. Personally, although I understand people wanting this, I don't think that humiliation is appropriate.

Ultimately, these are all dreadful situations, which cannot be "undone", unless we learn how to perform miracles (unlikely for me, I am a non-believer).

 

[Pale Rider]

The punishment is deprivation of liberty, not public humiliation.

It has long been accepted that press publicity - the shame of a court appearance - is an integral part of the process.

So, like it or not, there is an element of what you can reasonably call public humiliation, although the courts wouldn't call it that.

I accept Letby can be suitably shamed/humiliated whether she appears for sentence or not, but her's is a genuinely extraordinary case.

 

[Bromptonaut]

It has long been accepted that press publicity - the shame of a court appearance - is an integral part of the process.

So, like it or not, there is an element of what you can reasonably call public humiliation, although the courts wouldn't call it that.

I accept Letby can be suitably shamed/humiliated whether she appears for sentence or not, but her's is a genuinely extraordinary case.

I think you mean public knowledge is part of the process. The press, in the Northern Echo, Yorkshire POst or even Express sort of sense, is only part of the story.

 

[winjim]

Yes I think public humiliation is an inevitable side effect of public knowledge, which is necessary for the purposes of transparency. I absolutely do not think that humiliation should be in and of itself an objective of the judicial system.

 

[Pale Rider]

I think you mean public knowledge is part of the process.

Isn't that what I said?

Very few people attend courts, many, many, cases pass through with no one in the public gallery.

For most cases, there are only a handful of camp followers.

Even though all these cases are heard 'in public', realistically the only way they will see the light of day is via press publicity.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Very few people attend courts, many, many, cases pass through with no one in the public gallery.

Or no one anywhere else for that matter.

My post wasn't aimed at you personally so much as a commentary on the world as it is now.

AIUI the days of the local paper's court reporter perched in Buggsville Mags Ct from 10:00 until 16:00 every day are long over. We can no longer read that Mrs C over the road was convicted and fined £100 for failing to tax her car or that her husband was disqualified for year after one too many sherbets at the 19th hole.

Even the mainstream national print and broadcast media have dispensed with legal correspondents.

My post wasn't aimed at you personally so much as a commentary on the world as it is now.

 

[Mr Celine]

AIUI the days of the local paper's court reporter perched in Buggsville Mags Ct from 10:00 until 16:00 every day are long over.

My local rag still has two pages of court reports every week.

This gives rise to a weekly contest between Mrs Celine and I of former pupils v former clients.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Our local paper has a frequent court round up, complete with mug shots, but only of fairly serious crimes. I find it interesting that the US seem to allow you to find info on arrests and convictions pretty easily, and which prison someone is held in. You can search court records here but not easily. They seem to have a lot of info in the public domain in the US. I googled a friend who had moved to the States after they'd won an award. One of the top results was her address and house purchase price.

 

[Pale Rider]

AIUI the days of the local paper's court reporter perched in Buggsville Mags Ct from 10:00 until 16:00 every day are long over. We can no longer read that Mrs C over the road was convicted and fined £100 for failing to tax her car or that her husband was disqualified for year after one too many sherbets at the 19th hole.

Even the mainstream national print and broadcast media have dispensed with legal correspondents.

It's true court coverage is not what it was, but then neither is any other sort of coverage.

Legal correspondents for the nationals are a different beast, their brief is legal affairs, not court coverage.

Any news reporter will be expected to take their turn in court, which is still a big part of the daily news diet because it's so popular.

Letby is just a court case, albeit a big one.

Nothing much is known about it until the linen, still unwashed, is aired in a public court.

The criminal courts are obliged to provide the press with a weekly summary of decisions, which may be published.

Trouble is, it's just the bare facts, so while the name of the defendant, crime, and punishment does go in, the colour to make it a decent story is entirely absent.

As Aurora observes, things do appear a bit freer and easier in the US of A.

The general thinking appears to be anything done in the name of John Q Taxpayer can be published.

Thus you get mugshots of the likes of George Michael and Hugh Grant on arrest.

That would never happen here, different forces have different policies for the release of mugshots, but one will never be released before conviction.

Even then, a mugshot may only be released if the defendant is imprisoned for longer than a certain period of time, typically two years.

 

[fozy tornip]

What would have prevented the consultants now claiming to have had their concerns mis-handled by hospital management, going direct to the police themselves?

 

[BoldonLad]

What would have prevented the consultants now claiming to have had their concerns mis-handled by hospital management, going direct to the police themselves?

Nothing I would suspect, other than the fear of “reprisals” from management. Makes you wonder for whose benefit the NHS is run, doesn’t it? I think patients are way down the list.

 

[Cirrus]

Nothing I would suspect, other than the fear of “reprisals” from management. Makes you wonder for whose benefit the NHS is run, doesn’t it? I think patients are way down the list.

Was doing some work with a Trust a year or so ago and the management was appalling. I flagged several issues to them around patient/practitioner risk . All they were interested in was covering their arses.

I was quite concerned so raised a Datix, it got some wheels in motion but they were still ass covering when I moved on.