Lawyers’ warnings over judge-only fraud trials

Much has happened since January. Burnham replaced Sir Keir Starmer KC, Norris replaced Lammy but Sackman remained in post. Slaughter has become solicitor-general, The Times writes.

Specialist fraud lawyers smell a government rat amid suggestions that the argument in favour of ditching juries in those cases has moved from concerns over the ability to understand complex financial issues to the fact that those trials often run for many weeks, if not months. They are inconvenient for jurors, who normally are required for stints of a fortnight. 

“Retaining judge-only trials for fraud — on a justification that has now shifted from backlog reduction to juror convenience — is an unprincipled anomaly that should be removed from the bill entirely,” the City of London Law Society, a professional body, said. 

Louise Hodges, chairwoman of the society’s crime and corruption committee, added: “Jury trials are vital, fair and efficient. Juries are capable of trying technical and complex fraud and financial cases. The government has rightly recognised this for most serious offences — it must now apply the same logic consistently.”