British Courts

A description of the precise procedures that go on in British courts is something for a legal textbook. For those who aren't British, note that it's fairly similar to the American system - an adversarial system with prosecution and defence. This shouldn't be surprising, as the United States inherited The Common Law from Britain, and many states passed statutes of reception: laws that more or less said, "The way the law works in England is how it will work here, unless our statutes or constitution say otherwise." It has many of the same tropes, Amoral Attorney for example. There are differences.

We will be focusing on the criminal aspect here, since that's what the media does (tort cases aren't as interesting).

This applies to England and Wales. Scotland does things differently - see below. Some of this stuff applies to other parts of The Commonwealth as well.

Types of Criminal Courts

There are two basic types:
 * Magistrate's Court: Less serious offences. Magistrates hold the title JP, Justice of the Peace.
 * Crown Court: The serious cases. There are a number of these around the UK, but the most famous is the Central Criminal Court, on the site of the old Newgate Gaol. It is far better known as the Old Bailey (which is the name of the street it stands in). This is usually used for Greater London cases, but others can take place there on certain occasions. It has 20 court rooms.
 * V for Vendetta: V blows up the Old Bailey.
 * Rumpole of the Bailey: Centers on a defence barrister who mostly does Crown Court work, usually at the Old Bailey.
 * Garrow's Law: Centers on a defence barrister who mostly does Crown Court work, usually at the Old Bailey. The difference is that it's IN GEORGIAN TIMES!, and the barrister in question more or less invented defence work.

Media Reporting

Unlike in some US states and other jurisdictions, cameras are not allowed in a courtroom, either video or photographic. What you see on news reports are computer re-enactments (using virtual cardboard cutouts, essentially) and drawings of those involved. You can't actually do the drawings in the court itself (also unlike the United States, where there's usually a court artist scribbling away somewhere in the room), so notes are taken and scenes drawn later.

You also do not get the somewhat lurid speculation on new evidence that you find in the US. This is because of the rules of contempt of court. When a paper reports a criminal court case, it usually has to break out the Newspaper Speech Marks, so you'll get things like "Smith 'spent hours on porn sites'" or "'Mandy's secret drug deals'".

Newspapers will not give an opinion on the case during the trial, either in headlines or editorials. They cannot discuss the past record of the defendant and the jury are not told this either.

In rape cases, victims have the right to anonymity for life. This does not, however, apply to the defendants. This has caused some controversy in recent times when people have made up their accusations for malicious reasons. There does not appear to be an easy way to solve this - convictions are rare enough in rape cases as it is without the fear of being publicly exposed.

Children involved in a case also have a general right to anonymity, often being described as "Boy A" or "Girl C". However, there have been a number of cases where a judge has removed their anonymity after a conviction, mostly in cases of extreme depravity (the Jamie Bulger case, for example). This also applies for the rest of their lives.

Once the case has concluded and the person is found guilty (if that is the case), the restrictions are largely off. You can happily describe Mr. Smith as an evil sicko who needs castrating, comment on his past, accuse the police of failing to do their job properly, etc. This was particularly noticeable with the high profile murders of Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman. As soon as Ian Huntley was convicted it turned out he had committed a whole string of prior assaults.

Breaching these rules puts you in contempt of court and is a criminal offence.

Wigs, Robes and Accents

The most obvious feature that you'll see in a British court case on screen are the outfits. Let's bring over a famous fictional US lawyer, Perry Mason. If he was a QC (see below) defending a case in the UK, Perry Mason would be wearing a silk gown over his suit, a black coat and waistcoat, plus a short horsehair wig. Clerical bands are also worn around stand up collars (for men) or flat ones (women). The bands are often incorrectly portrayed as huge great flappy things. More junior lawyers are in fact called junior barristers and wear the same attire as their senior counterparts, except that their gowns are not made from silk but from an inferior material.

The most noticeable figure is of course the judge. The precise form of address differs, but broadly corresponds to the Judge's colour of attire. What follows is complicated, but that's the British Legal System for you. It takes fancy dress VERY seriously.


 * Black: Appeal Court Judges usually sit in threes and wear a black silk gown like Q Cs. Their wigs are not as curly as a barristers though. They are called 'My Lord' or 'My Lady'. Officially they are 'Lord Justices' and hear criminal appeals in the 'Queens Bench Division'.
 * 'Recorders' also wear black. These are part time Judges who are practising barristers. They are called 'Your Honour' and look like Appeal Court Judges, but wear the curly wig. Invariably hear shop lifting cases.
 * Red: High Court Judges. Sit alone hearing mega serious criminal trials with a Jury. Known as 'Red Judges' they have elaborate fur cuffs and resemble Father Christmas when they've got their glad rags on. Called 'My Lord' or 'My Lady'. Officially "Mr/Mrs Justice (surname)"
 * Purple: Circuit (or 'circus' for a laugh) Judges who hear anything from theft to serious violent crimes with a Jury. Usually retired Barristers who couldn't make QC and have given up on the High Court Bench, and want a nice pension.


 * Suits: Magistrates who hear most criminal cases, which tend to be contested speeding tickets and the like, do not get to dress up and instead wear suits. Barristers call them 'Sir' or 'Madam' whilst solicitors often call them 'Your Worship'. All lawyers in magistrate courts wear suits as well. Horse hair is noticeably absent. Magistrates sit in threes and are lay people like juries, only they are sad enough to volunteer for the (unpaid) job.
 * District Judges (or stipendiary (stipe) judges) are solicitors or barristers who sit full time in suits hearing the slightly more serious cases in the Mags courts. They are 'Sir' or 'Madame' to you.

Judges used to have long (full bottomed) wigs, but these are now used only for ceremonial occasions. Any Judge sitting at the Old Bailey is referred to as 'My Lord/Lady' regardless of their seniority - unless the TV show or film in question is inaccurate. Most are.

The whole court dress thing can be dispensed with in very hot weather or if minors are being tried, since it could be intimidating.

Gavels are not used, contrary to popular portrayal. British courts are notably more orderly than their American counterparts. The sight of men in horsehair can intimidate the most hardened criminal.

In Britain the court will rise when the Judge enters the room, and then he will nod his head in the direction of the lawyers, who will respond. Bowing one's head to the judge when you enter or leave the court is also customary. This is more about bowing to the Queen's Justice than to individuals. Only legal folk generally do the bowing bit. If you don't stand you will get shouted out though.

The accents thing? Judges for quite a long time were mostly from highly upper-class backgrounds, mostly white and mostly old. This has led to a number of notable cases of judges showing a large-scale ignorance of popular culture:
 * One asked who Paul Gascoigne was. He is famous British footballer with 57 England caps to his name, meaning that he played in the English national team 57 times.
 * Another, in a libel case involving British athlete Linford Christie, had to have the expression "Linford's lunchbox" (the bulge in his Lycra shorts, being his you-know-whats) explained to him.
 * Perhaps most famously - although possibly apocryphally - a judge in the 1960s had to have it explained to him that the Beatles were "a popular beat combo".
 * Not actually true, well it's true the judge asked, but not because they were in any way out of touch. Judges ask these sorts of "silly" questions because the court cannot assume the jury is familiar with them. Popular prejudice to the contrary, judges are no more out of touch than anyone else. Some of them may even read this site. When it comes to social fairness, human behaviour and actual justice they know a hell of a lot more about what works than the public, tabloid hacks and most politicians.
 * Someone sounds bitter.
 * The explanation of why judges ask such questions is nevertheless correct - for the information of the jury.
 * And also because the court records are historical documents. What might be bloody obvious right now may well be a minor footnote of popular culture twenty years later (or have vanished entirely, few kids in the playground these days would be familiar with the term Linford's Lunchbox for example), thus it needs to be explained for the sake of future readers (since the UK is a precedent based judicial system this is rather important), and also noted in case of an appeal at a later date.

Pronouncing Sentence

See Gaol Time.

Double Jeopardy

Britain used to employ the "double jeopardy" rule, but has now removed it- a case may be re-tried if significant new evidence comes to light. This has only happened twice so far

Some terms

There are some terms that non-Brits will not be familiar with. The courts themselves decided that Brits themselves found many of them strange and changed some of them in 1994.
 * Barristers (advocates in Scotland) - argue a client's case in court and provide solicitors with legal advice. To become a barrister you have to be "called to the Bar" (the Bar being the professional body for barristers) and be a member of one of the Inns of Court. There are now just four active in London- Lincoln's Inn, Gray's Inn, Inner Temple and Middle Temple. These are rather akin to Oxbridge colleges and can all be found near Temple Tube station.
 * There is also one in Stroke Country and another in Ireland itself.
 * Inns of Court exist in the US, but they are far less prominent and you can be in a Bar Association instead.
 * Inner Temple has been used as a filming location in a number of fictional dramas- such as The Brief, The Da Vinci Code and The Bill. The website has a bunch of rules on the matter.
 * If you're a good enough barrister, you can be appointed King's or Queen's Counsel, called "taking silk". This is now done by a nine-member panel, rather than the Government. A famous QC is Cherie Booth, better known by many as Cherie Blair, the wife of the former Prime Minister Tony Blair.
 * In fact, "the bar" was originally a barrier between the tables where the students ate, and those of the barristers. A student was required to "eat your terms". That is, dine at the Inn some number of times, for three years. If and when the senior lawyers decided he was acceptable he was invited to join them beyond said barrier.
 * Solicitors - Provide legal advice. Separate from a barrister in the UK system, unlike in the US.
 * Solicitors can appear in court too, albeit at the very lowest levels for minor cases. With enough training and experience they can also qualify to appear in higher courts (these are called "rights of audience"), in which case they're called Solicitor Advocates. So, what is the difference between a Solicitor Advocate and a Barrister, you might ask? Not much.
 * Before the courts were all mashed together (partly in 1857, completely in 1873) there were SIX different flavor lawyers! Barristers, the equity court (Chancery), serjeants in common-law (King's Bench, Common Pleas, and the Exchequer), and advocates in admiralty and church courts (5 different courts). The barristers worked with attorneys, the serjeants with solicitors, and the advocates with proctors. Some of these show up in 19th century novels.

Court Room Terms There are some specificially British terms used inside the courtoom.


 * "My Learned (prounounced Learn-ed) friend" is how barristers will refer to each other. They will always use the third person, anything else is considered rude. Sometimes 'learned' is omitted in lower courts.
 * Seeing as how solicitors are only allowed in the lower courts, they only ever use "my friend" to refer to each other.
 * The title "learned" is actually quite precious to barristers, as when barristers are elected to the House of Commons (and they often are), they are entitled to be called "my learned friend" (by their party--and now coalition—colleagues) or "the learned member for..." (by their opponents) rather than "my honourable friend" or "the honourable member for...". This even extends to current and former members of the Cabinet, the Privy Council, and others (including increasingly junior parliamentarians thought worthy enough of note, such as Frank Field under Tony Blair's leadership) entitled to the much loftier style "right honourable", who (if barristers) are referred to as "my right honourable and learned friend" or "the right honourable and learned member for...".
 * "If your Lordship pleases" is the equivelent of the American "If the Court pleases". Any reference to the Court is usually replaced with the Judge's title in the UK, likewise references to The State or The People will be replaced with reference to the Queen or the Crown.
 * "Would this be a convenient moment?" spoken to a lawyer is a judicial euphemism for "Please shut up now it's lunch time"

Differences in Scotland

A lot. For starters, there are three types of basic criminal courts:


 * District Court: Only deals with very minor offences, and may have a lay judge.
 * Sherriff Court: More or less equivalent to the Magistrates Court in England, although for less serious crimes, the Sherriff (judge) may sit without a jury.
 * The High Court of Justiciary: Generally called the High Court. Tries the most serious offences. There are permanent sittings in Edinburgh and Glasgow, and it is also a circuit court, visiting other Scottish cities and large towns. Always has a jury. Judges here are referred to as My Lord.

There are also three possible verdicts in a Scottish criminal case:


 * Guilty
 * Not Guilty
 * Not Proven

There is no substantive difference between Not Guilty and Not Proven - both mean you are legally innocent. Originally the two verdicts were 'Proven' and 'Not Proven'. Juries who thought the case had been proved but that the law was wrong then began using the verdict 'Not Guilty'. After a further while the original 'Proven' verdict was replaced by 'Guilty'. However, the 'Not Proven' verdict never went a way and nowadays it has taken on a new meaning. Juries now use it to say that they think the defendant may well be guilty, but they can't be sure, whereas they often reserve the not guilty verdict for those they are more convinced is innocent. Regardless, the only way you become a criminal is if you are found 'Guilty'. Double Jeapordy is also still in place in Scotland.

Also, it is not allowed for a person accused of rape to personally cross-examine the alleged victim, even if the defendant is conducting his own defence.