Welcome to "The Open Court"
The Open Court is a public law journal dedicated to sophisticated legal discourse and judicial analysis for the modern age.
THE OPEN COURT JOURNAL
Are Trials Without Jury the Solution to Crown Court Delays?
‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ – William Gladstone, 1868
The criminal justice system is facing one of the biggest challenges of the last decade. The backlog of criminal cases in the crown court has reached a record high and is, concerningly, only increasing. As of December 2024, there were over 75,000 outstanding cases in the Crown court.
Table of Contents
Are Trials Without Jury the Solution to Crown Court Delays?
By Sofia Harris - Tarif
‘Justice delayed is justice denied’ – William Gladstone, 1868
The criminal justice system is facing one of the biggest challenges of the last decade. The backlog of criminal cases in the crown court has reached a record high and is, concerningly, only increasing. As of December 2024, there were over 75,000 outstanding cases in the Crown court. Trial dates are now even being set for 2029, defendants are left in the dark for years, unable to have closure. (But why is this?)
Why are there delays?
There are delays in the crown court due to various financial, political and social factors. For example, decreased funding to the criminal justice system which has meant that the crown court has had decreased productivity from 2016-2024. The crown court has been hearing almost 20% fewer hours per sitting day (when the court is in session) so far in 2025/26 than it was in 2016/17. In turn, the case backlog has grown by nearly 8,000 (10%).
Furthermore, the COVID-19 pandemic further put pressure on the crown court due to social distancing rules making it extremely difficult to run jury trials. Adapting to these rules using innovations such as remote hearings and digital case-management tools helped keep parts of the system running but were unable to replicate a full jury trial.
Increased policing, as established by the Crime and Policing Bill also contributed to the delays. This is because the greater focus on serious crime including knife crime and violence against women and girls has resulted in more arrests for these crimes and consequently, more cases going to the crown court.
What are the impacts of this?
For victims, the impacts of prolonged delays can have detrimental consequences. These include many withdrawing from cases which impacts evidence quality and undermines public faith in the justice system. It can also be extremely damaging to victims’ mental health who are going through these traumatic situations without any end in sight. This can further increase stress on victims, causing them to use unhealthy coping mechanisms such as drugs or alcohol.
“I feel like I can’t remember the second half of my 20s. The only memory I’ve got of the second half of my 20s is going through the court system...”
Mila, one of the victims who shared their experiences, said:
“I’m 30 now and I was 25 when I reported. I feel like I can’t remember the second half of my 20s. The only memory I’ve got of the second half of my 20s is going through the court system because that’s all you can think about and your life gets put on hold… literally it’s like I woke up one day and I’d lost five years of my life.”
Recommendations for new procedures
In conclusion, the major backlog of cases faced by the crown court has a damaging impact on both victims and legal professionals. However, it could be solved through the government’s proposed reforms alongside further investment in the workforce and technology to allow courts to increase their productivity.
For further simplified information:
- Easy Read : Independent Review of the Criminal Courts Part 1
- Reference List
- Independent Review of the Criminal Courts: Part 1, Executive summary pg. 4
- Current process Annex E - Large format flowchart
- New process Annex E - Large format flowchart
One proposed solution to the case backlog is removing juries from some trials, instead Brian Leveson’s government-commissioned review recommended using something called a ‘bench division’, which is a single judge sitting with two lay people (non-legal professionals). These judge-only trials are estimated to be 20% quicker than jury trials, helping to ease the problem. Many legal professionals also take issue with the increased pressure that this change will put on judges, However, Cassie Rowland said that “The government’s proposed reforms to jury trials will not fix the problems in the crown court. The time savings from judge-only trials will be marginal at best, amounting to less than 2% of crown court time.” She instead proposed that the government should make a more drastic change to the legal system, in hearing more trials in magistrates’ courts. Implementing this change would potentially save more time than judge-only trials however it the government has not yet set out specific details of this plan and these estimates are majorly uncertain.
References & Further Reading
Easy Read
Simplified information regarding the Independent Review of the Criminal Courts Part 1.
Reference List
- Independent Review of the Criminal Courts: Part 1, Executive summary pg. 4
- Current process Annex E - Large format flowchart
- New process Annex E - Large format flowchart
Process Diagrams
Visual representations and flowcharts detailing the current and proposed judicial procedures.