The Official Report is a written record of public meetings of the Parliament and committees.
All Official Reports of meetings in the Debating Chamber of the Scottish Parliament.
All Official Reports of public meetings of committees.
Displaying 4809 contributions
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
Thank you. I bring in Anisha Yaseen.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
Thank you, Anisha. I invite members to ask questions. Russell Findlay will be first.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
For the record, when you say “VIA”, are you referring to the victim information and advice service in the court system?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
Thank you, Hannah. Finally, does Sarah want to say anything?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
We have around 10 minutes left. At this point, I will bring in Pauline McNeill.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
I have one very final question, picking up on a point that Hannah Stakes made about court transcripts. There is a proposal for an audio transcript. Would survivors welcome that? Would that be a helpful, positive option?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
Before I bring the session to a close, would any of you like to make any final points?
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
I will bring in Sharon Dowey in a moment, but I want to pick up on Sarah Ashby’s concern about judge-only trials. I was having a quick look through the submission from Rape Crisis Scotland, which has articulated things quite helpfully in respect of the scenario in which there is a judge only and no jury. It said:
“A written verdict could be a very positive development for complainers.”
In other words, if a case were to be heard by a judge only, they would have a responsibility to set out reasons for coming to the decision or the verdict that they came to. The submission goes on to say:
“A judge would be required to give reasons for a decision. Some survivors describe the lack of any explanation for a jury’s decision as distressing because it means they are never able to understand what happened.”
The written judgments from other cases seem to have added some weight to that.
Do you feel that such an approach might reassure survivors as to the merits of a judge-only trial? I am not putting words in your mouth; I am just interested in whether you feel that it might provide some reassurance.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
It is just after 10 minutes to 1, and we are looking to run the evidence session until just after 1. A couple of members still want to come in but, before I bring in Russell Findlay, I will interject and cover an issue that we have not picked up this morning, which is anonymity for victims.
Assuming that you are supportive of the provision on anonymity for victims, are there ways in which you would like to see the proposals in the bill changed or strengthened—for example, in relation to the offences covered or the duration of anonymity? The issue was covered to a greater or lesser degree in some of your written submissions, but I would like to pick it up in committee.
Criminal Justice Committee
Meeting date: 17 January 2024
Audrey Nicoll
That is helpful—thanks very much.