Bradford's Crown Prosecution Service came in for a hammering last week from Judge Gerald Coles QC who accused it of incompetence and hampering efforts to clear a backlog of criminal cases at Bradford Crown Court. Reporter Catrina Dick investigates other reasons for the court's huge workload, and looks at the effect of delays on the people involved.

Branch Crown prosecutor Richard Hodgson can remember a time in the 1970s when two, sometimes only one, Crown Court sat in Bradford each day. There were five prosecuting solicitors and relatively minor offences like shoplifting were common.

Since then Crown Courts in Huddersfield and Wakefield have closed, putting extra pressure on Bradford. There are now 27 prosecutors in the city and up to eight courts sitting each day, hearing the most serious cases imaginable such as rape and child abuse.

"My view is that there's more crime now than ever there was and the nature of the cases is heavier," said Mr Hodgson, although police declared Bradford a safe place to live in April this year when they revealed an overall drop in crime over the last three years.

"The real reason for the backlog is that there's too much work for the number of court rooms, judges, and administrative staff. It's quite wrong to blame the CPS even though we're not perfect and some cases do go off on our account.

"I don't attach any blame to anybody. It's just the way the system operates. It's a hard life, there's a lot of work, and sometimes things go wrong. All the agencies have to play a part in addressing the problem."

He said the CPS received 25,000 defendants in 1997, up 5,000 from 1996. And according to the Lord Chancellor's Department, at the end of June this year there were 1,036 cases waiting for a trial date in Bradford compared with 4,092 over the North East circuit which stretches from the Scottish border to South Yorkshire. That had jumped from 828 in Bradford at the end of June 1997 against 4,281 on the circuit.

Frank Taylor, group manager at Bradford Law Courts which includes the Crown Court, agrees that the real issue is the volume of work involved.

Part of the reason, he believes, is that "over the last couple of years West Yorkshire has had a higher committal rate to Crown Court than other regions nationally."

From 1996 to 1997, Bradford Crown Court received 2,627 cases - the second highest in the country after Liverpool. That rose to 2,821 in 1997-1998, putting it third behind Liverpool and Leeds.

Only last week Home Secretary Jack Straw unveiled a range of options in a bid to address that situation by reforming the system for cases that can be heard by magistrates or Crown Court juries. One alternative is to scrap the defendant's right to elect trial by jury if they have a previous conviction for a similar offence.

Mr Taylor, who said an action plan was implemented several months ago to tackle the Bradford backlog, added: "Judge Coles wasn't simply singling the CPS out.

"There a range of people involved in the process and it isn't just a question of a court room and judge being available. In taking steps to deal with the backlog we're in close contact with the CPS, the police and other agencies. Regular meetings take place with CPS representatives to exchange information. And there will be other meetings set up to address the issues raised by Judge Coles."

Caught in the middle are the victims, defendants, and witnesses.

Graham Woodall, of Bradford Magistrates' Court witness service, an independent service which offers practical and emotional support to prosecution and defence witnesses, said: "Some people worry about giving evidence, seeing the defendant, repercussions and not knowing the system. Any delay in getting a case to court just prolongs the worry which isn't good for witnesses, particularly the victims."

But he said: "The thing that really concerns us is the number of times witnesses have to attend court. A case can be listed then adjourned, then the witnesses have to go back to court again. It's inconvenient and creates tension and distress.

"If we get early notification of witnesses, we can prepare them for court. A more relaxed witness makes a better witness. Even if we get them as settled as possible, they can still be nervous. Then the case can be adjourned, for whatever reason, and they have to go through it all again."

Delays can also put additional pressure on defendants - who, at the end of the day, may be cleared after spending months on remand or bail.

Stephen Shaw, of the Prison Reform Trust, said: "People may end up serving a sentence before conviction and not after, which is perverse."

He added: "Thousands of people wait over three months and hundreds wait over a year to be tried. The proportion of people acquitted or not sent to prison at Crown Court is very high indeed."

Crown Court executive Ben Jones, of Bradford solicitors Alan Petherbridge and Co, said: "Our principle concern is that people are being remanded in custody or put on bail then, six months or more down the line, they are being found not guilty or are being acquitted through the inadequacies of the CPS to handle the case properly.

"We're also concerned about the delay in trials being listed. We're now receiving trials listed for January 1999.''

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.