It’s finally arrived, live TV broadcasting from the Court of Appeal is upon us. Will it improve justice? Or will it make justice more enigmatic?
The government is touting live TV as a landmark day for justice, but we think there are pros and cons to this new development (think lawyers playing up to the camera for effect versus expert witnesses pressured to behave ethically in the glare of the spotlight). What do you think?
Researching Reform 
I have been involved in 3 appeal cases ,and in each of them the judges retired for around 5 minutes and then returned with a long judgement of 20 pages or more that had obviously been typed out before the case began ! Maybe TV might help prevent the iniquitous practice of deciding the judgements before hearing any live evidence as viewers would soon pick up on this….. On second thoughts ,so would the judges so they would simply retire with tea and biscuits for half an hour instead of the usual 5 minutes !
LikeLike
If people think its going to be like how it is depicted on TV they will be disappointed.
Filming should start in the lower courts. A decision has been made by the time it goes for Appeal and I believe most cases are refused leave to appeal.
The Judgement is not truly representative of what happens in the lower court. If it were to show what happens they would see gross miscarriages of justice as parents and grandparents on their coat tails, are prevented from putting their case across due to a lack of proper legal assistance, or a lack of knowledge of the law if they choose to be LIPs. Court cases seem to be more about how good your barrister is, than what is the truth!
They would see how the social workers and Cafcass rule the family court Judges and see how the experts paint a picture about the family, giving the family negative assessments based on their opinon. This has a ”ring of truth” as they are professionals. They would see that the family cannot counter their arguments as they only know what is alleged as the local authority barrister gives the statements just before going into court and no one has the opportunity to read them properly.
The way the family court operates it is no wonder that only 22% of care orders were rejected in 2011. That 22 in 10,000! In 2007 it was 27%! How can families go up against the might of the local authorities?
It starts in the lower court and filming should start there. That way you could follow the case from the start to Appeal. In criminal court high profile cases are reported on from the beginning to the end, why not family court? There can be nothing more serious than removal of a child from the family but family court professionals are blasé about the damage they cause in their pursuit of winning! Same Judge, same professionals, same Court. A nice cosy, incestuous group, none that are held accountable for what they say and do, despite the ramifications.
LikeLike