Understanding the Court Process: A Shared Responsibility

JusticeIsNow works to amplify the voices of complainants of sexual violence through a structured feedback service. This service enables individuals to share their experiences of the court process, including how specific questions, tone, or approaches may have impacted them.

This is not intended as criticism or condemnation of barristers or any individual professional. Instead, it is designed to:

• Deepen understanding across the system

• Support reflective practice

• Reduce unnecessary harm where possible

• Provide clarity and closure for complainants

Importantly, this work extends beyond barristers. It recognises that the court experience is shaped by the entire system—including judges, court administration, listing decisions, CPS processes, and infrastructure capacity.

Supporting Complainants to Understand the System

Many complainants invest significant time, emotional energy, and hope into the court process. Where a conviction is not secured—or where delays and adjournments occur—this can lead to:

• Anger

• Disappointment

• Disillusionment

Our feedback service helps individuals to better understand:

• The adversarial nature of the legal system

• The role of defence barristers in testing evidence

• The evidential thresholds required for conviction

• The wider systemic pressures affecting outcomes

We are clear: we operate within an adversarial system, and defence barristers have a professional duty to do their job.

A Note on Conviction Rates

JusticeIsNow is also clear that low conviction rates in sexual violence cases are not caused by barristers.

Conviction outcomes are shaped by a range of factors, including:

• The evidential thresholds required in criminal law

• The availability and quality of evidence

• The adversarial nature of the justice system

• Delays, disclosure issues, and wider system pressures

Barristers—both prosecution and defence—operate within this framework and are required to apply the law to the evidence before the court.

Our work is not about attributing blame to individual professionals. Instead, it is about:

• Increasing understanding of how the system operates

• Reducing unnecessary harm within that system

• Improving communication and transparency for complainants

• Supporting constructive dialogue across all parts of the justice process

• Challenging rape myths and misconceptions 

However, if conviction rates are to remain low, then the very least we can do as a society is ensure harm reduction, transparency, and meaningful intervention are in place.

Case Study: When Delays Are Beyond Individual Control

Through our work, we regularly encounter situations where complainants understandably attribute distressing experiences—particularly delays—to individual barristers. However, these situations are often the result of system-wide pressures rather than individual conduct.

In one recent case, a trial was adjourned multiple times over a two-year period due to:

• Additional allegations requiring further CPS preparation

• Lack of availability of an intermediary for the complainant

• Disclosure requirements

• Judicial availability constraints

• Court capacity issues, including inability to accommodate special measures

• A last-minute disruption caused by international travel complications affecting counsel

At each stage, decisions were shaped by court availability, procedural requirements, and systemic backlog, rather than the actions of any one individual.

From the perspective of complainants, these delays can feel deeply personal and distressing. However, from the perspective of legal professionals, they often reflect a system operating at or beyond capacity.

A System Under Pressure

Feedback from legal professionals highlights that:

• Criminal courts are facing record backlogs of jury trials

• Barristers are working under extreme pressure and burnout

• Many factors affecting cases are entirely outside their control

• Retention in criminal practice is becoming increasingly difficult

At the same time, complainants experience:

• Long delays

• Uncertainty

• Limited communication about why decisions are made

This creates a disconnect—where frustration is often directed at individuals, rather than understood as part of a wider systemic issue.

JusticeIsNow’s Role: Bridging the Gap

JusticeIsNow sits in the middle of this space.

We work to:

• Share complainants’ experiences with legal professionals in a constructive, anonymised way

• Provide complainants and ISVAs with clear, fact-based explanations of what has happened and why

• Highlight examples of good practice across the system

• Advocate for improved communication and transparency from courts and institutions

We are currently inviting RASSO barristers and legal professionals to engage with this work through a newsletter sharing:

• Lived experiences (anonymised)

• System insights

• Examples of effective and trauma-informed practice

Individual barristers may also be approached only at the request of complainants.

Recognising Good Practice

Across our court observations over the past three years, we have seen examples of strong and thoughtful practice—particularly from members of the judiciary.

Judges have been praised for:

• Interjecting appropriately where needed

• Providing clear explanations to juries

• Supporting understanding of complex evidence

These moments matter. They demonstrate that fairness is not only about outcomes, but about how the process is experienced.

Moving Forward

If conviction rates remain low, then the responsibility of the system must go beyond outcomes. It must include:

• Reducing avoidable harm

• Improving communication with complainants

• Ensuring meaningful intervention where harm has occurred

• Supporting all professionals working within a strained system