This research examines the reasons for which criminal trials in Australia fail to proceed on the day of listing. The rationale of such an inquiry is that matters that fail to proceed as scheduled contribute to backlog and delay, both of which consume significant criminal justice resources. Moreover, delay in the criminal trial system may result in adverse effects, not the least of which is the anguish endured by the victims of crime and their families, and the community demanding protection from criminal offenders. This research used quantitative data from courts across a number of Australian states and territories to demonstrate that more than half of all listed criminal trials fail to commence on the listed day. After an analysis of data about trials and extensive interviews with court administrators, it is found that those trials that do not proceed can be placed into two categories: those trials that are finalised on or near the trial date either by way of late guilty plea or late withdrawal by the prosecution, and those trials that are adjourned and re-listed. While some delays will be inevitable, the report builds on recommendations made by a working group of the Standing Committee of Attorneys-General to suggest ways of reducing the backlog of criminal trials across Australia.

Reforms have been underway over the last three decades to address the disadvantages that victim/survivors of sexual assault face within the criminal justice system in Australia. Such reforms include expansion of advocate services, specialisation of police, alternative provisions for giving evidence at trial, and changes to jury instructions. This report was commissioned to examine the implementation of these reforms and their impact on the victim/survivor experience. Drawing on interviews with 81 criminal justice professionals including counsellors, lawyers and judges, it looks at victim/survivor-focused approaches, promising and innovative practices, the take up of reforms, the factors that enable or inhibit victim-focused reforms being embedded in court practices, and the potential for future reform.

This edited collection brings together scholars and practitioners in every chapter to provide a comprehensive and unique exploration of courts in Australia. The primary focus is to identify controversies, challenges and change, in the form of potential reforms within the courts across Australian jurisdictions. Bringing forward original research and scholarship on a wide array of courts in Australia, combined with insightful practitioner perspectives, research will be effectively integrated with practice. This book is the first comprehensive collection of its kind to canvas the diversity of courts in Australia, providing comprehensive critical analysis of contemporary issues, debates and reforms. It considers the array of courts across state, territory and national jurisdictions in Australia, including coroners’ courts, family courts, criminal, civil courts and problem solving courts. It also adopts an intersectional approach, providing insights into the perspectives of various court users such as people with disability, ethnic minorities, Indigenous Australians, and victims of crime. Each chapter provides opportunities for further debate among scholars, practitioners and students regarding potential future directions for reform to improve the efficacy, equity and accessibility of Australian courts.This collection serves as an international ready reference for students, scholars and practitioners alike.

In 2009, Stephen Barker was convicted of rape on the evidence of a little girl who was four-and-a-half years old at the trial, and about three-and-a-half when first interviewed by the police. The high point of the proceedings was the child's appearance as a live witness in order for Barker's counsel to attempt a cross-examination. This case focused attention on the need, imposed by current English law, for even tiny children to come to court for a live cross-examination. In 1989, the Pigot Committee proposed a scheme under which the whole of a young child's evidence, including cross-examination, would be obtained out of court and in advance of trial. In 1999 a provision designed to give effect to this was included in the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act, but it has not yet been brought into force. The full Pigot proposal was implemented, however, in Western Australia, and similar schemes operate in a number of European jurisdictions. This book of essays examines a number of these schemes, and argues the case for further reforms in the UK.

Despite a popular view that trials are the focal point of the criminal justice process, in reality, the most frequent way a criminal matter resolves is not through a fiercely fought battle between state and defendant, but instead through a process of negotiation between the prosecution and defence, resulting in a defendant pleading guilty in exchange for agreed concessions from the prosecution. This book presents an original empirical case-study of plea negotiations drawing upon interviews with legal actors and an analysis of defence practitioner case files, to shine light on the processes and ways in which an agreed outcome is reached in criminal prosecutions, within the setting of a jurisdiction, like many others world-wide, which is suffering major shifts in state resources. Plea negotiations, also referred to as “plea bargaining”, “negotiated guilty pleas” and “negotiated resolutions” are neither an alloyed benefit nor a detriment for defendants, victims or the criminal justice system generally, and like all compromises, this book shows how the perfect “justice” outcome gives way to the good, or just the reasonably acceptable justice outcome.