Faulty Adversarial Performance by Criminal Defenders in the Crown Court

Abstract

Who is the more able advocate, the lawyer in the United States or the barrister in England and Wales? Answering that question is extremely difficult because of a multitude of differences in the procedural regimes in which each works and in the scope of each\u27s responsibility. Yet, one facet stands out, like a full moon in a dark sky: The comparative number of defenders who on appeal have been accused of having provided inappropriate representation in the process leading to conviction . . . Part 1 discusses the procedural hurdles that make challenging the trial barrister\u27s conduct more difficult than objecting to the lawyer\u27s, and the reasons why making this challenge is less important. Part 2 examines the law; Part 3 grades the Court of Appeal\u27s decisions; Part 4 considers how the challenges, even when unsuccessful, reveal the loci of problems that arise in criminal defense in Crown Court