An interesting story in a few of the papers today is the case of the magistrate in Blackburn who faces disciplinary action after using the term “absolute scum” to describe young defendants in court.
The Daily Mail story (almost verbatim) is interesting because it offers us an insight into some public opinion in the comments underneath, almost all of whom agree with the magistrate and say that his comments were justified and correct. This raises an interesting question about magistrates – whose justice do magistrates dispense?
Justice, of course, is the crown’s and the Queen’s and last Monday I swore two oaths – both included phrases to serve and pledge alliegance to the Queen and her successors. But if magistrates are taken from the local population, shouldn’t they be free to express the views of the society they serve? Well, yes and no. Magistrates are free to express the court’s views on a crime or sentence to defendants within certain perameters if they are serving as a bench chairman.
But the Judicial Oath also contains in it the words:
“I will do right to all manner of people after the laws and usages of the Realm without fear or favour, affection or ill will”
To me, although the bit about the Queen is important, it is this forward-facing part of the oaths that is most relevant on a day-to-day basis. The magistrate on this occasion may feel he was speaking for the community and that by phrasing it the way he did and attributing the “absolute scum” to what “normal people”, rather than he or the court might think he was ameliorating the bane.
But what he has actually done is created the perception – however misplaced – of ”ill will” towards the defendants and reinforced those feelings within the community. That, it my view, goes against the Judicial Oath. The fact that the comments were made in a Youth Court – where particularly sensitive and careful work with young people goes on – is also unfortunate.
The gentleman concerned is an experienced magistrate and has given considerable service to his community. And the culture of the magistracy generally is one of ongoing training, improvement and support for everyone involved – we all make mistakes and discussion, correction and learning is the positive approach to addressing them.
But, sorry to disappoint the Daily Mail, we can’t have justices appointing themselves as “voices of the community” or stamping their own moral code on the courtroom, however awful the offence and unrepetent the defendant.
Using their reasonable judgement to dispense justice according to the law is the sole purpose of a justice; anything else is politics and that, as we know, belongs in a different place.




