Compare And Contrast Magistrates And The Crown Court

In this essay I am going to discuss the magistrates and the crown court, and their function within the court hierarchy. The crown court is seen to deal with more serious offences referred to as indictable offences, which carry a higher sentence. Whereas the magistrates court deals with summary offences, carrying a lesser sentence than other courts in its division. Both courts are part of the criminal justice system, and deal with disputes between individuals and the state.

In the old bailey court the atmosphere of the court was very serious and formal, and vastly tense. This was similar to the atmosphere of the magistrate’s court. The layout of the old bailey was different to those of other crown courts, where the public gallery was separate

As was present when visiting the crown court in Woodgreen, the case where an individual was accused of the supply of drugs and theft, where the jury was dismissed. The judge gave legal reasoning for why. In this trial it was due to new information, which had arisen which, could manipulate the verdict given for the first count heard. This is a different approach to of the magistrates court where 3 lay individuals, or a district judge hears the trial the magistrate/s play a big part in the magistrates court, however only after hearing all evidence, and witness statements This was visible in the trial watched at Westminster magistrates court, where there was an individual popular in the public eye accused of 2 accounts of sexual assault, and eight incident assaults. In the trial the representatives of the claimant and defendant, and witnesses played an important part in the trial. There were no outcomes of the crown and magistrate’s court when visited, and both cases were timetabled for another hearing. This system was introduced by the Woolf reforms, after great delays in trials. The timetable enables individuals to have their case in a reasonable time