Do you think the absence of legal representation might have been causative (in which case why has this taken all this time to occur in a British court) or is this just a freak occurrence?
It would be mildly ironic if security became a major new expense in the administration of justice when Legal Aid has been cut back so much.
The courts are crumbling. Everything about them are underfunded which includes the level and quality of court staff, Court clerks, security. All this will have an impact. If he had been represented he could have used his lawyer as a verbal and even physical punch bag which would have deflected his anger from the Judge. The lawyer would have had early warning signs of anger and aggression, any mental health issues. They might have been able to address any unfairness or abuse of power. They would usually have experience of dealing with very distressed and violent litigants. Many of the litigants in the family courts will have convictions for violence and significant issues.
The courts are so badly neglected there will only ne more of this.
I note that some of the northern ones are closed due to the presence of RAAC, how did they distinguish that from the general neglect…
People will do worse than attack judges… they don’t bother using the courts at all
The growing chasm between Vos and the dreams of the ever growing online process and the bitter reality of the need for courts to help bring some order to those less well off is depressing
I can remember how busy the courts were 20 years ago. They are less busy by design through wilful neglect . That doesn’t mean that things are getting better….
I remember one of the first times I was in court. It was in Newcastle and I was about 17. I was let into a family court hearing for some reason. I was the only person there other than the judge, usher and the husband and wife. No one hit anyone but it really sad. How do you cut children in half ? Thank goodness I don't have to make decisions about which parent lives with their children. I am not surprised someone turned to violence. Usually in the very rare cases when this happens someone puts themselves in front of the judge to protect the judge but perhaps there was not time. If we have moved to having judges closer to people that is a bad move - keeping them behind an imposing raised bit a good distance away is a good idea.
Do you think the absence of legal representation might have been causative (in which case why has this taken all this time to occur in a British court) or is this just a freak occurrence?
Lack of legal representation is a major factor. There's nobody to dispel the echo chamber that "everyone is against me". The attacker is of a mindset that he cannot even see that attacking the judge is not the sort of behaviour likely to get him custody.
It's also a false economy. MacFarlane wants family cases done in three hearings tops, which is doable if both parties have legal advice. Not if the judge has to spend half the day explaining what "contact" is.
No details about what the attack was though. Even if it were a swift lunge, there's usually a bit of distance to cover, there is usually a safe route out behind the bench, and judges have panic buttons under the judicial desk. That's not going to get security in instantly but there ought to be enough time to get out of the way. Had the attacker snuck in a knife? Or thrown a jug of water?
Fixed costs recovery, it seems to me, will make litigation MORE expensive not less.
If you have a claim, and instruct a legal team, you will not recover the costs you would previously have recovered if you win. If you lose, it may be that you'll have to pay less to the other side, but then you've lost. And you'll still have your own costs to pay.
I have seen it suggested that lawyers won't charge so much because of fixed recovery, which is nonsense. They'll charge just what they want because fixed costs affects their client if the other side loses, and one side won't have any effect on what the other side's charging rates are.
0
0
I was slightly surprised this isn’t a specific offence with a mandatory min sentence.
Dont have a view on the best response, other than people should continue to be allowed to represent themselves
0
0
I assume the government has already come out in support of the rule of law?
0
0
It seems insane there isn’t routine security inside family courts to be honest. I am surprised this doesn’t happen more often.
0
0
Do you think the absence of legal representation might have been causative (in which case why has this taken all this time to occur in a British court) or is this just a freak occurrence?
It would be mildly ironic if security became a major new expense in the administration of justice when Legal Aid has been cut back so much.
1
0
The courts are crumbling. Everything about them are underfunded which includes the level and quality of court staff, Court clerks, security. All this will have an impact. If he had been represented he could have used his lawyer as a verbal and even physical punch bag which would have deflected his anger from the Judge. The lawyer would have had early warning signs of anger and aggression, any mental health issues. They might have been able to address any unfairness or abuse of power. They would usually have experience of dealing with very distressed and violent litigants. Many of the litigants in the family courts will have convictions for violence and significant issues.
0
0
Britain is broken, part #458375
But nobody cares part #46364675857
0
0
The courts are so badly neglected there will only ne more of this.
I note that some of the northern ones are closed due to the presence of RAAC, how did they distinguish that from the general neglect…
People will do worse than attack judges… they don’t bother using the courts at all
The growing chasm between Vos and the dreams of the ever growing online process and the bitter reality of the need for courts to help bring some order to those less well off is depressing
I can remember how busy the courts were 20 years ago. They are less busy by design through wilful neglect . That doesn’t mean that things are getting better….
0
0
I remember one of the first times I was in court. It was in Newcastle and I was about 17. I was let into a family court hearing for some reason. I was the only person there other than the judge, usher and the husband and wife. No one hit anyone but it really sad. How do you cut children in half ? Thank goodness I don't have to make decisions about which parent lives with their children. I am not surprised someone turned to violence. Usually in the very rare cases when this happens someone puts themselves in front of the judge to protect the judge but perhaps there was not time. If we have moved to having judges closer to people that is a bad move - keeping them behind an imposing raised bit a good distance away is a good idea.
0
0
You would have to be a nutter to become a family court judge these days.
Even if it’s a pay rise from a provincial counsel/solicitor income, the stress and general bollix you put up must make it a no-no.
But for any half-decent London counsel or solicitor surely it means a big pay cut?
0
1
Lack of legal representation is a major factor. There's nobody to dispel the echo chamber that "everyone is against me". The attacker is of a mindset that he cannot even see that attacking the judge is not the sort of behaviour likely to get him custody.
It's also a false economy. MacFarlane wants family cases done in three hearings tops, which is doable if both parties have legal advice. Not if the judge has to spend half the day explaining what "contact" is.
No details about what the attack was though. Even if it were a swift lunge, there's usually a bit of distance to cover, there is usually a safe route out behind the bench, and judges have panic buttons under the judicial desk. That's not going to get security in instantly but there ought to be enough time to get out of the way. Had the attacker snuck in a knife? Or thrown a jug of water?
0
0
According to a hastily removed report on the gazette a “radiator” was thrown…..
No doubt a plug in one wheeled in to make up for the lack of heating….
The court buildings are a disgrace. The staff are under resourced…
But there’s a few nice new buildings at the top of the system and there’s all kinds of online creativity that will “increase access to justice”
Fixed costs will soon rip through the civil system. Meaning even more angry litigants in person….
All these savings are a false economy….
0
0
Fixed costs recovery, it seems to me, will make litigation MORE expensive not less.
If you have a claim, and instruct a legal team, you will not recover the costs you would previously have recovered if you win. If you lose, it may be that you'll have to pay less to the other side, but then you've lost. And you'll still have your own costs to pay.
I have seen it suggested that lawyers won't charge so much because of fixed recovery, which is nonsense. They'll charge just what they want because fixed costs affects their client if the other side loses, and one side won't have any effect on what the other side's charging rates are.
Join the discussion