*/
“First and foremost the CPS has created a platform on which it can aspire to a wider range of high quality advocacy in the generality of cases” is a conclusion of the first thematic review of prosecution advocacy in the Crown and magistrates’ courts in nine years.
The review, which was published on 16 July, was carried out by a team included advocacy trainers, recently retired circuit judges and members of Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) Inspectorate.
Although the report found that differences between self-employed counsel and Crown advocates were “not so striking” as the authors had been led to expect, there was a discrepancy based on the nature of the hearing. In non-contested matters, “a greater majority of Crown advocates were fully competent in comparison to counsel” but counsel, “with an air of authority and in a more positive manner” performed better in trial hearings and across all individual aspects of trial advocacy apart from the closing speech. The quality of cross-examination by in-house advocates was in particular “found wanting” and was noted as needing particular attention for further development.
29 per cent of counsel were rated “very good or above average” compared to 22.5 per cent of Crown advocates, but 25 per cent of each group were deemed “lacklustre”. The idea that competition would lead to higher standards across the board was “not always made out”. It “certainly provided for a higher proportion of very good advocates but does not eliminate weaknesses at the other end of the scale”, and some counsel seemed ill-prepared or even indifferent, the report found. Because of the complexity of factors, the report declined to make an assessment of the CPS strategy’s value for money.
The review, which was published on 16 July, was carried out by a team included advocacy trainers, recently retired circuit judges and members of Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service (“CPS”) Inspectorate.
Although the report found that differences between self-employed counsel and Crown advocates were “not so striking” as the authors had been led to expect, there was a discrepancy based on the nature of the hearing. In non-contested matters, “a greater majority of Crown advocates were fully competent in comparison to counsel” but counsel, “with an air of authority and in a more positive manner” performed better in trial hearings and across all individual aspects of trial advocacy apart from the closing speech. The quality of cross-examination by in-house advocates was in particular “found wanting” and was noted as needing particular attention for further development.
29 per cent of counsel were rated “very good or above average” compared to 22.5 per cent of Crown advocates, but 25 per cent of each group were deemed “lacklustre”. The idea that competition would lead to higher standards across the board was “not always made out”. It “certainly provided for a higher proportion of very good advocates but does not eliminate weaknesses at the other end of the scale”, and some counsel seemed ill-prepared or even indifferent, the report found. Because of the complexity of factors, the report declined to make an assessment of the CPS strategy’s value for money.
“First and foremost the CPS has created a platform on which it can aspire to a wider range of high quality advocacy in the generality of cases” is a conclusion of the first thematic review of prosecution advocacy in the Crown and magistrates’ courts in nine years.
Now is the time to tackle inappropriate behaviour at the Bar as well as extend our reach and collaboration with organisations and individuals at home and abroad
A comparison – Dan Monaghan, Head of DWF Chambers, invites two viewpoints
And if not, why not? asks Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management
Marie Law, Head of Toxicology at AlphaBiolabs, discusses the many benefits of oral fluid drug testing for child welfare and protection matters
To mark International Women’s Day, Louise Crush of Westgate Wealth Management looks at how financial planning can help bridge the gap
Casey Randall of AlphaBiolabs answers some of the most common questions regarding relationship DNA testing for court
Maria Scotland and Niamh Wilkie report from the Bar Council’s 2024 visit to the United Arab Emirates exploring practice development opportunities for the England and Wales family Bar
Marking Neurodiversity Week 2025, an anonymous barrister shares the revelations and emotions from a mid-career diagnosis with a view to encouraging others to find out more
David Wurtzel analyses the outcome of the 2024 silk competition and how it compares with previous years, revealing some striking trends and home truths for the profession
Save for some high-flyers and those who can become commercial arbitrators, it is generally a question of all or nothing but that does not mean moving from hero to zero, says Andrew Hillier