THE GRAND JURY

Hokitika Guardian, 17 July 1933, Page 8

THE GRAND JURY

BILL PROPOSING ABOLITION

ADVOCACY OF ENGLISH JUDGES

LONDON, July 5

Tlie Lord Chancellor, Viscount 'Sankey, in his zeal for legal reforms, has introduced into" the House of Lords a bill which proposes to abolish the grand jury." Moving" the second reading of the bill Lord Sankey said: ' “Consider What happens in an ordinary criminal case. The man is charged' with an indictable offence. is brought before a bench of 'magistrates, who hear witnesses for the prosecution and give tlie defendiVht'tm opportunity of showing his deienoe. if there is no prima facie Case ’, tile man is discharged. If the magistrates "are satisfied that, on tho evidence, there is a prana facie case they commit him to trial at quarter sessions or assizes; but, as the law now stands, this is not enough to enable him to lie tried. Many dwellers in his country or borough are summoned to the first day of quarter sessions or assizes to ensure that ‘a' grand jury of 23 persons will be available. These persons hear the same witnesses for the prosecution all over again, the latter having to be brought there, for that purpose, and it is only when the grand jury have agreed with the magistrates that there is a prima facie case (as they generally do) that the. man is tried by the judge and petty jury. : “The number of cases thrown out by grand juries in infinitesimal, but Lfie inconvenience' is very remarkable. Take big assizes'—say, for example, London, Manchester, Liverpool, Leeds, Birmingham, or Cardiff—where there are sometimes as many as 100 people charged.

“Supposing there to be four witnesses in each case it mean bringing 400 people to the first, day of tlie assizes to repeat the evidence on which a prima facie ease lias been thought to be established, and then they are all dismissed and have to come up again when their particular case is reached. It may be that there is a different- countable in every case, and so. large numbers of constables are taken 'from their ; duty on the first day of assizes.. Ls -an. intermediate inquiry by" the grand jury really necjossary? It .imposes 1 -a. burden upon a :large number of persons summoned’ as jtirors.. • ...- . . ■ j ‘‘ln tliei Aetirt.T93i—the last statistics ’ available —it -wfisi' ‘calculated that 22,'2 72 - people- were s ummoned 'for this duty in London and. the provinces.- In these/ days we : have many experienced stipendiary ; magistrates and many experienced justices, and with their knowledge 4!nd with a vigilant press it -haidt.y‘seeing necessary that for the ■ second time a tribunal should decide if there is a prima facie case to be tried. “What perhaps ‘is very serious is, that, aS has already been pointed out, an army of witnesses is guiuttioned for the inquiry before the graiid jury,’ and then they must wait about, perhaps fori A day' ori two, till the ca.se chines on. before the petty jury, or else go hack to their home's ahd return for the trial —a constant eoufse of irritation.

“All : this’ mehnh. expense.. Statistics are difficult to obtain, but there is reason for -thinking, according to the Hanwhrth Report, that of the sums allowed from public funds for witnesses in criminal trials at quarter sessions and assizes more than one-third would have been saved if there had been no inquiry before a grand jury; and,this tilth's' ho account of the other expenses incurred' by the witnesses' themselves, or of tlie losses caused to them by the dislocation of their private business'," or' of thh costs to local funds caused by the attendance of the police. ! “What harm would he done if the grand jury were to go? The answer ;s, T Slibmif, ‘None .at all.’ The presuihptiOn. of innocence is one of the safeguards of our liberties. There is nothing in this bill to weaken that safeguard in any way whatever. All it provides is that when a bench of magistrates have solemnly declared, on the sworn'evidence, that there is ;,a prima 'facie case against the person charged he shall be put upon his trial —a trial 'which, as your Lordships know full well, is a model of fairness to all,the world.”

: Lord Darling, the famous judge who supported the bill.saidr “With regard tq the abolition of grand juries, anyone I think, who hag a liking for old things hiust regret to ; see them go, but one can hardly help 'recognising that there has not survived for a long time any real utility. When they were first made part of the law of the land is lost in antiquity, but in those days there were no magistrates. “There was no inquiry before a Jiifiti'ce of the Peace, and committal .of the prisoner for trial. There was an inquiry before all the wise men of tlie' county, of whom there must have been a large number in olden days, and'if they agreed that a person should be put upon his trial, or should he discharged; that happened to him. - “The grand jury arose out of those practices. Now a man is always brought before either a bench of magistrates or a magistrate, and he is either acquitted or bonvicted, or committed for trial. 'As to the grand jury, they, invariably acted on tho .advice of the judge. Ido not think I can recall an insjta'noe"where a grand jury said that there Was no true bill unless the judge had indicated to them', pretty plainly, that they,ought to say so.”