Trial procedure in magistrates' court and Crown Court - Role...

Learning Outcomes

This article outlines criminal trial procedure in the magistrates’ court and Crown Court, and the distinct roles of judges, juries, magistrates, and District Judges, including:

• Distinctions between summary trials in the magistrates’ court and trials on indictment in the Crown Court
• Division of responsibility for law and fact between judge, jury, magistrates, and District Judges
• Responsibility for deciding questions of law and fact at each stage of the trial
• Conduct of proceedings, evidential rules, and proof standards in both courts
• The burden and standard of proof and statutory reverse burdens
• Admissions of fact under s.10 Criminal Justice Act 1967 and their legal effect
• Submissions of no case to answer and the consequences of their application
• The correct sequence of events at trial and the function of key stages
• The conduct of voir dires and the separation of law and fact
• Special measures and the handling of vulnerable parties
• Application of these principles to realistic scenarios under current law in England and Wales

SQE1 Syllabus

For SQE1, you are required to understand criminal trial procedure in the magistrates’ court and Crown Court, including the roles of judges, juries, magistrates, and District Judges, with a focus on the following syllabus points:

• The distinction between summary, either-way, and indictable-only offences and their route to trial.
• The different personnel presiding over trials: lay magistrates, District Judges (Magistrates’ Courts), Circuit Judges, and juries.
• The respective roles of the judge and jury (or magistrates/District Judge) in relation to determinations of law, fact, and admissibility of evidence.
• All stages of criminal trial procedure in both magistrates’ court and Crown Court, from pre-trial to verdict and sentencing, including procedural safeguards and specialized hearings.
• The application of the burden and standard of proof, and exceptions (e.g. reverse burdens).
• Admissibility of evidence, including the function and conduct of voir dire (trials within a trial).
• The process for majority verdicts in jury trials and the legal requirements for their acceptance.
• The practical operation of case management, special measures for vulnerable witnesses, and the impact of professional duties and conduct on trial procedure.
• The effect of admissions by the parties and the available routes of appeal from both courts.

Test Your Knowledge

Attempt these questions before reading this article. If you find some difficult or cannot remember the answers, remember to look more closely at that area during your revision.

1. Who decides both law and fact in a summary trial in the magistrates’ court?
2. What is the standard of proof required for a criminal conviction?
3. True or false: In the Crown Court, the jury decides whether evidence is admissible.
4. What is the purpose of the judge’s summing up in a Crown Court trial?

Introduction

Criminal trials in England and Wales are conducted either in the magistrates’ court (summary trial) or the Crown Court (trial on indictment or for serious either-way offences). The division of responsibility between tribunals of law and fact, the running of the trial, and the sequence of procedural stages differ significantly between these courts. Not only is it important to know which court hears which type of offence, but also who within those courts performs key judicial functions: determining the law, assessing evidence, and returning a verdict. Clear knowledge of how questions of law and fact are divided, and understanding the logic behind this division, is essential for an accurate application of criminal trial procedure.

Key Term: Tribunal of Law
The person or body responsible for ruling on the legal issues in a trial—including the admissibility of evidence, the interpretation of statutes, and guidance on relevant legal tests.

Key Term: Tribunal of Fact
The person or body responsible for finding facts based on the evidence and applying the law (as directed) to reach a verdict.

Trial Procedure in the Magistrates’ Court

The majority of criminal prosecutions begin—and are usually completed—in the magistrates’ court. This court deals with all summary-only offences as well as most either-way offences unless the latter are sent to the Crown Court due to seriousness, complexity, or the defendant’s election for jury trial.

Personnel and Decision-Making

Cases in the magistrates’ court are heard either by a bench of lay magistrates (usually three) or by a District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts). Both perform the dual function of being the tribunal of law and of fact. The magistrates’ bench is assisted by a legally qualified adviser, whose role is to advise on law and procedure but who does not participate in fact-finding or decision-making.

Key Term: Lay Magistrates
Unpaid, unqualified (in law) volunteers from the community, sitting in panels and making decisions on both law and fact, always advised by a legal adviser on the law.

Key Term: District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts)
A full-time, professionally qualified judge who sits alone in the magistrates’ court, deciding both law and fact.

Throughout trial, magistrates or the District Judge determine all questions relating to:

• The admissibility or exclusion of evidence
• The application and interpretation of legal rules
• The credibility and factual weight of witness testimony
• The ultimate question of guilt or innocence (“the verdict”)
• Sentencing, if the defendant is convicted.

Where the magistrates retire to deliberate on verdict and sentence they are required by law to give reasons for their decisions, particularly on conviction, to explain to the parties how they have reached their findings.

Stages of a Summary Trial

The procedure in the magistrates' court is highly structured to ensure fairness and clarity:

• Prosecution Opening: The prosecution succinctly outlines the case and key legal issues for the court.
• Prosecution Evidence: Prosecution witnesses (including police and expert witnesses, if any) are called for examination-in-chief and subsequently cross-examined by the defence. Evidence-in-chief must be elicited through non-leading questions, establishing the facts and chronology. If the evidence is not in dispute, it may sometimes be read.
• Defence Submission of No Case to Answer: Once the prosecution closes its case, the defence may make a submission for ‘no case to answer’. This is a legal argument that, on the prosecution's evidence taken at its highest, no properly directed tribunal of fact could convict.
• Defence Evidence: If there is a case to answer, the defence may present its own witnesses, including the defendant, each of whom is examined, cross-examined, and re-examined.
• Closing Speeches: The defence is always permitted to make a closing speech. The prosecution may make a closing speech only if the defence is represented or introduces evidence other than its own testimony.
• Verdict: The magistrates or District Judge decide the verdict and must provide sufficient reasons if convicting, explaining the basis for their finding.
• Sentence: If the court finds the defendant guilty, sentencing follows, often after a pre-sentence report.

Key Term: Submission of No Case to Answer
A defence argument (usually at the close of the prosecution case) contending that the evidence is insufficient for conviction. If successful, it leads to an acquittal without the defence needing to call evidence. The legal test is whether, when taken at its highest, a reasonable court could properly convict.

Magistrates’ court procedure incorporates specific directions for vulnerable witnesses, including special measures, and the legal adviser will guide the bench as to the relevant law and procedural fairness, but all ultimate rulings are made by the court itself.

Burden and Standard of Proof

In keeping with the fundamental principle of English criminal law from Woolmington v DPP [1935], the prosecution always bears the legal burden of proving the defendant’s guilt.

• The standard is ‘beyond reasonable doubt’ – the magistrates or District Judge must be “sure” of guilt based on the evidence heard.
• On any defence raised (e.g. self-defence), the prosecution must disprove it to this standard, except where Parliament has created a reverse burden (as with diminished responsibility).

Key Term: Burden and Standard of Proof
The burden of proof is the party’s responsibility for proving a fact or the whole case. The standard of proof for criminal conviction is proof ‘beyond reasonable doubt’: the magistrates or jury must be sure the defendant is guilty. For reverse burden defences, the standard on the defence is only the balance of probabilities.

Admissions and Agreed Evidence

Either party can make formal admissions of fact under s.10 Criminal Justice Act 1967, and these are binding on the court. Agreed evidence does not require proof via witness testimony, which assists in speeding trials and focusing disputes.

Trial Procedure in the Crown Court

The Crown Court tries all indictable-only offences and those either-way offences which are considered too serious or complex for the magistrates’ court, or where the defendant elects jury trial. The Crown Court features a strict division of legal responsibility between judge and jury, and enhanced procedural safeguards to protect the fairness of proceedings.

Roles of Judge and Jury

Judge

The judge (usually a Circuit Judge or High Court Judge) serves as the tribunal of law and is responsible for:

• Managing the trial by ensuring fairness, compliance with procedure, and the observance of the law.
• Ruling on all legal issues, including the admissibility or exclusion of evidence (alone in voir dire hearings).
• Giving all parties the opportunity to make legal submissions and address matters of law before the jury.
• Directing the jury at summing up: reviewing the evidence and instructing them on the law to be applied.
• Deciding ancillary matters such as whether special measures are required for witnesses.
• Passing sentence if the defendant is convicted.

Key Term: Voir Dire
A hearing (or “trial within a trial”) in which the judge (in the Crown Court, in the absence of the jury) rules on the admissibility of evidence or other legal questions that must not be aired before the jury due to risk of prejudice. Witnesses may be called and cross-examined regarding facts relevant to admissibility.

The judge excludes the jury from any voir dire hearing to shield them from inadmissible or prejudicial material. This upholds the fundamental common law rule of separating facts (for the jury) and law (for the judge).

Jury

The jury is the tribunal of fact, composed of 12 lay citizens randomly selected from the community and sworn to decide the case impartially.

• The jury’s principal role is to determine, after hearing all admissible evidence and the judge’s summing up, whether the prosecution has proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
• The jury is required to follow the law as explained by the judge, without introducing their own standards.
• The jury is obliged to deliberate in private and return a verdict of “Guilty” or “Not Guilty” on each count of the indictment.

Key Term: Jury
A randomly selected group of 12 lay persons who, after listening to the law and the evidence, decide whether the prosecution has proved each charge against the defendant beyond reasonable doubt.

Separation of Law and Fact

This division ensures that:

• Legal issues (what law applies, the framework for reaching a verdict, admissibility of evidence, procedure) are settled by the judge, including all legal directions to the jury.
• Factual questions (credibility, weight, whether to believe a witness, the truth of the events) are reserved solely for the jury.
• Any attempt by the jury to decide a legal dispute, or by the judge to decide the facts, violates the criminal trial’s fundamental principles and can invalidate the process.

Where a defendant is tried by judge alone (very rare, and requires statutory authority), the judge will decide both law and fact.

Stages of a Crown Court Trial

• Empanelling the Jury: 12 jurors are selected at random from the jury pool and sworn in.
• Prosecution Opening Speech: The prosecution outlines its case and key legal issues for the jury.
• Prosecution Evidence: Witnesses are called, sworn, and examined in detail. The judge ensures evidence conforms to legal rules.
• Defence Submission of No Case to Answer: After the prosecution case, the defence may make a submission to the judge that there is insufficient evidence (as in R v Galbraith [1981]). The jury is excused while this submission is argued.
• Defence Evidence: The defence may present its case, including witnesses, and challenge the prosecution’s version of events. The defendant may or may not choose to give evidence and must be specifically warned about the implications of remaining silent.
• Closing Speeches: Both prosecution and defence make final speeches to the jury, summing up their respective cases.
• Judge’s Summing Up: The judge addresses the jury, summarising the law and the key evidence, and sets out the questions they must answer to reach a verdict rooted in the law.

Key Term: Summing Up
The judge's review of the evidence and directions to the jury on the law before they retire to deliberate. The judge must remain impartial and present both sides’ cases fairly.

• Jury Deliberation: The jury retires in private to deliberate. They must try to reach a unanimous verdict, but after a minimum period (at least two hours and ten minutes), a majority verdict may be accepted.
• Verdict: The jury’s decision is delivered in open court by the foreperson and is binding on all parties. For 12 jurors, a majority of 11-1 or 10-2 is accepted; for a panel reduced to 10 or 11, 10-1 or 9-1.
• Sentencing: If the verdict is guilty, the judge passes sentence according to relevant guidelines and statute.

Key Term: Majority Verdict
A verdict on which a legally permitted majority (e.g., 10-2, 11-1) agrees, permitted if a unanimous verdict is not forthcoming after sufficient time. The court must ensure the jury have had a reasonable opportunity to reach unanimity before a majority is accepted.

Key Term: Verdict
The decision of guilty or not guilty delivered by the tribunal of fact (jury or magistrates) after all evidence and summing up. In the Crown Court, the foreperson of the jury delivers the verdict in open court. If there are multiple counts on the indictment, the jury must return a verdict for each.

Special Features

• Pre-trial case management (Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing) allows the judge to clarify issues, manage disclosure, and ensure trials proceed efficiently.
• Special measures (such as screening, live link evidence, intermediaries) may be ordered for vulnerable witnesses or defendants.

Worked Example 1.1

Scenario: During a Crown Court trial for fraud, a dispute arises about whether the defendant’s previous convictions are admissible as bad character evidence. The judge is asked to decide on the admissibility, and the defence wishes to challenge the prosecution’s application to admit this evidence.

Answer:
The judge, as the tribunal of law, decides the admissibility of evidence after hearing legal argument, and this is done in the absence of the jury (usually via a voir dire). The jury must not learn of the contested evidence until and unless the judge rules it is admissible. If admitted, the jury may consider the evidence when reaching their verdict.

Worked Example 1.2

Scenario: In a summary trial in the magistrates’ court, the prosecution closes its case. The defence argues that the evidence cannot possibly support a conviction even if taken at its highest.

Answer:
The defence makes a submission of no case to answer. The magistrates or District Judge, acting as both tribunal of law and fact, consider the legal test: whether a reasonable court could properly convict on the evidence as it stands. If the answer is no, the court acquits; if yes, the trial continues to the defence case.

Worked Example 1.3

Scenario: During a Crown Court trial, the judge suspects that evidence has been improperly admitted and is prejudicial to the defendant’s case.

Answer:
The judge has the discretion, under s.78 PACE 1984, to exclude evidence if admitting it would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that it ought not to be admitted. The judge may do so either during trial (in the presence or absence of the jury as appropriate) or during a voir dire.

Key Term: Worked Example
A worked example is a detailed, hypothetical scenario illustrating the application of a legal principle or procedural rule to practical facts, always followed by a model answer guiding correct legal reasoning.

Competence, Special Measures, and Professional Conduct

The conduct of a criminal trial must also comply with strict requirements regarding the examination of witnesses, special measures for vulnerable witnesses, and professional conduct of the participants.

Key Term: Competent (of a witness)
A person who may lawfully be called to give evidence. All persons are presumed competent unless incapable of understanding the questions or giving intelligible answers.

Where a witness gives evidence, they must be examined in chief, cross-examined, and may be re-examined. Leading questions are not permitted during examination in chief except with the court’s leave. Special measures, such as screening, live link, or evidence via intermediary, are available to support vulnerable witnesses, and their use is directed by the judge or the magistrates on application.

Solicitors and barristers are considered officers of the court and must never mislead the tribunal, putting duties to the court above even the interests of their client if the two conflict.

Professional Conduct: The Solicitor’s Role

If a client admits guilt but wishes to plead not guilty, the solicitor must not mislead the court and may only continue to act if they do not present a positive defence known to be false. At trial, the advocate may put the prosecution to proof and challenge the evidence but may not adduce or suggest any argument they know to be false.

Summary

Key Point Checklist

This article has covered the following key knowledge points:

• The magistrates’ court tries summary-only and most either-way offences, while the Crown Court hears all indictable-only offences and more serious either-way offences.
• In the magistrates’ court, magistrates or a District Judge decide all questions of law and fact, rule on the admissibility of evidence, give the verdict, and pass sentence.
• In the Crown Court, the judge decides all questions of law, procedure, and admissibility of evidence, and explains the law to the jury, who decide the facts and return the verdict. Sentencing is reserved to the judge.
• The prosecution bears the legal and evidential burden of proof in criminal trials; the exception is rare reverse burdens (e.g. diminished responsibility).
• The burden of proof is normally “beyond reasonable doubt”; for reverse burdens, it is “the balance of probabilities”.
• Key trial stages in both courts include the opening of the case, examination and cross-examination of witnesses, close of prosecution and defence cases, submissions of no case to answer, closing speeches, delivery of verdict, and sentencing.
• Admissions of fact may be made in writing or orally; they bind the court and remove the need for formal proof.
• Voir dires are hearings in the absence of the jury in the Crown Court, and before the magistrates or District Judge in the magistrates’ court, to determine admissibility of evidence.
• A summing up occurs only in the Crown Court. The judge reviews the evidence and directs the jury on the law.
• In the Crown Court, a majority verdict is permissible if unanimity cannot be reached after at least two hours and ten minutes of deliberation (minimum numbers depend on how many jurors remain).
• The mode of address, rules on leading questions, and the handling of vulnerable witnesses differ between courts, but all must comply with procedural fairness and the right to a fair trial.
• A solicitor’s primary duty is to the court: they must not knowingly mislead the court, may not act in a conflict of interest, and cannot continue to represent a client who insists on giving false evidence.

Key Terms and Concepts

• Tribunal of Law
• Tribunal of Fact
• Lay Magistrates
• District Judge (Magistrates’ Courts)
• Burden and Standard of Proof
• Submission of No Case to Answer
• Voir Dire
• Jury
• Summing Up
• Majority Verdict
• Verdict
• Competent (of a witness)
• Worked Example