Re-evaluating post-conviction disclosure: A case for ‘better late than never’

This article contends that the legal position regarding the scope of post-conviction disclosure duties ought to be revisited. First, it will discuss the leading Supreme Court case on this issue Nunn v Chief Constable of Suffolk Police and will argue that the decision warrants reconsideration as it is grounded in flawed assumptions that cannot be sustained. Second, it will make the case for strengthening the rights of defendants to access material post-trial, particularly in a climate of austerity where more defendants are relying on university projects and other charitable organisations to assist them in appealing against their conviction. Third, the article will suggest that consideration is given to proposals in an ‘Open Justice Charter’ to promote fairness and transparency in the criminal justice system and, furthermore, will suggest that an independent disclosure agency ought to be established to deal with criminal disclosure issues pre and post-trial

Does the Crown Court Discriminate Against Muslim-Named Offenders? A Novel Investigation Based on Text Mining Techniques

Most research in sentencing discrimination in the United Kingdom has relied on aggregate analyses comparing disparities by ethnic group. These studies fail to consider differences in the individual characteristics of the cases processed. To circumvent the lack of official data, we scraped sentence records stored in a commercial website, from which a sample of 8,437 offenders sentenced to custody in the Crown Court from 2007 to 2017 was generated. Using the names of the offenders, we have been able to classify 8.6 per cent of our sample as having a traditional Muslim name. We find that Muslim-named offenders received sentences 9.8 per cent longer than the rest of the sample. However, this difference disappeared once we accounted for the type of offence and other key case characteristics