Our Day in Court

As promised yesterday here is my experience of the Coroner’s Court, specifically the one in Hastings, East Sussex. First of all it was easy to find, it was a fairly modern building in a type of emergency service complex, police, fire, an courts together about one mile out of town. There was ample cheap parking in the adjacent sports centre.

First of all the level of security surprised me. We had to walk through a metal detector and then had a security wand passed over us. I guess that they were looking for weapons. I suppose that in a criminal trial that security of this type is paramount.

The proceedings took place in one of the building’s four magistrate’s courts. This was designed to inspire awe at the full panoply of the law. The Coroner sat in the Magistrates chair that was three levels above us; we were definitely looked down on. There was an assistant who sat in front of him, and then us in the centre of the courtroom where I think that the lawyers would normally sit. The witnesses were separated behind us in a small-seated area. As there were only five people who gave written statements we were all like peas in a pod.

In turn the witnesses came to the witness box, which in this case was a grandiose term for a sort of cordoned off seat. They swore an oath and read their evidence. Generally this was from pre-prepared statement that the coroner had already seen. The coroner’s role was to add explanatory lay mans comments to this evidence. This was particularly when a medical term was used, when in doubt he referred to the consultant of the local hospital. To me he also seemed to lead the witnesses, with such phrases as, “this is what you would expect in an 87 year old lady”, At points he did clarify things like if the care home had an accident reporting system. There were also written statements that the coroner summarised and read out. At the end of each statement we were allowed to ask questions. This was a surprise to me as the explanatory book that I had been given had suggested that this would not be the case. My questions were really simple statements to thank the care home and the hospital doctor for the compassion that they had shown to my mother.

This all took about an hour, at the end of which the coroner declared that the death was accidental, a decision that I think was no surprise to anyone. Throughout the coroner had dealt with us all in a very courteous and relaxed manner. What did I think?

• I think that it is excellent that there is an independent system to account for sudden or unexpected deaths.
• In the majority of cases there should be a streamlined or fast-tracked process. Any statements should all be circulated in advance and questions asked. For instance if we had have had any medical questions we would have needed advance notice.
• Written evidence would prevent the need for professionals like the ambulance workers and doctors taking valuable time off to attend. 
• In the case of our session it should have taken place in a conference room, as it was discursive rather than adversarial.  It would have promoted a better atmosphere. 
• It is obvious now to me how in major cases such as Hillsborough evidence can be massaged, and that it would take a skilled interrogator to get to the truth.

Well these are my comments; I would be interested to hear Marion’s views as she accompanied me. It was a long day leaving home at 6am and returning at 10pm, but I feel that it was good to have been there. I also feel more versed in the civic structure of our society. May be a visit to such courts as these should be on the curriculum for eighteen year olds, I believe that its used to be called Civics.

Tomorrow I will blog the antidote to our day in the courts.