The Commissioner for Victims in London has urged for increased assistance to help vulnerable witnesses prepare for the “intimidating and distressing experience” of testifying in court.

Claire Waxman pointed out that some victims endure waits of up to seven years from the time they report a crime until the trial begins, with approximately 146 victims dropping out of the system monthly after charges are filed.

“When victims hesitate to come forward or disengage from the justice process, it hampers our ability to hold offenders accountable, leaving the public exposed to potential risks,” she stated.

In a policy paper, she recommended specialized sessions aimed at preparing witnesses for the confrontational aspects of cross-examination, virtual tours of courtrooms, and establishing a single contact point to guide them through the legal system.

What are the opinions of plaintiffs and professionals within the criminal justice sphere regarding these proposals?

Ms. Waxman, whose role involves collaborating with victims and relevant agencies to enhance their experience within the criminal justice framework, noted a record backlog of over 18,000 cases pending in London crown courts.

“What often happens is cases can be postponed the night before or on the morning of the trial, after victims have mentally prepared themselves. Such delays significantly affect them, forcing them to put their lives on pause,” she explained.

“Testifying in court and going through cross-examination is an extraordinarily daunting and distressing process, and I believe we fail to provide victims with adequate support for this ordeal.”

In July, Ms. Waxman released a report indicating that on average, 40% of victims in the study withdrew from the justice process before any charging decision was made.

She is expected to assume the role of victims’ commissioner for England and Wales in the upcoming year.

Violet, a pseudonym used to maintain her anonymity, recounted her experience of waiting five years between reporting her rape to the police and the start of her trial.

“The wait is unbearable and filled with dread,” she shared.

“The entire process is incredibly harsh on mental well-being. Reliving the traumatic events of your life in front of strangers multiple times over five years is unimaginably distressing.”

She noted that there were “numerous occasions” when she considered stepping away from the process.

“There was something inside me compelling me to reach the courtroom, but I realize that not everyone feels that way.”

Unfortunately, the defendants were ultimately acquitted.

Despite conducting extensive research and reading about legal proceedings, Violet expressed that nothing could truly prepare her for the court experience, which she referred to as “the judge’s house.”

“It’s not a space meant for victims; we are merely fitting into the culture of the courtroom,” she explained. “In other settings, like meetings and presentations, people are typically there to foster your input, but the courtroom is quite different. The cross-examination feels like preparing for a battle.”

Ms. Waxman emphasized the need for focused sessions where trained support staff can coach vulnerable witnesses on clear communication, appropriate eye contact, and simulate cross-examinations.

To ensure witnesses remain unbiased when giving their testimony—preserving the defendant’s right to a fair trial—Ms. Waxman mentioned that role-playing should involve neutral scenarios, such as discussing a trip to the cinema.

She noted that while some preparations exist, they often come across as rushed or insufficient due to the unavailability of courtroom facilities.

Violet recounted how she participated in a preparatory session where she was quizzed about seemingly trivial matters, like what she had for breakfast.

“Asking what I ate or what color my bowl was seems silly, but these questions are crucial in helping someone brace for what could be an overwhelming and traumatic moment.”

She described the session as a “lifeline” and believed it would be beneficial for others.

Ms. Waxman acknowledged the need for safeguards to prevent witnesses from being perceived as having been “coached,” which could damage their credibility in trial.

She emphasized that the curriculum for these preparatory sessions should be developed in collaboration with the Crown Prosecution Service, the judiciary, and the Criminal Bar Association, and suggested that defense witnesses should also have access to such support to guarantee fairness.

The goal, she emphasized, is to help victims feel “confident in their surroundings.”

“Many victims might speak English as a second language, which adds complexity to their understanding. Some have neurodivergent conditions or disabilities that can complicate their ability to effectively communicate in court. We’re aiming to help them become comfortable with public speaking.”

Moreover, Ms. Waxman advocated for 360-degree videos of London courthouses to be made available online, with the potential for virtual reality tours to help victims familiarize themselves with the courtroom environment and its roles.

Even though some victims can visit the court in advance of their hearings, she noted that unexpected changes can complicate this process.

Riel Karmy-Jones KC, chairperson of the Criminal Bar Association, expressed general support for enhancing complainants’ preparatory experiences in trial settings, particularly for sensitive cases like rape.

She stressed that too often, complainants only meet with their prosecuting barristers just before court, when they’re feeling “extremely anxious.”

“Victims should not be placed in situations where they are taken aback by confrontations during their testimonies or shocked to find their credibility challenged,” Ms. Karmy-Jones KC remarked, asserting that lawyers are best positioned to offer such support, provided they are compensated fairly, while also raising questions on the timing and content of the preparatory sessions.

Kaya Comer-Schwartz, the deputy mayor for policing and crime, expressed strong backing for initiatives aimed at making the justice process more navigable for victims and enhancing comprehensive support systems.

Dr. Nigel Gould-Davies stated that visiting a courtroom prior to giving evidence in his case against a woman convicted of stalking him was “immensely beneficial”.

Farah Damji, 58, was sentenced to six years at Wood Green Crown Court in July.

Dr. Gould-Davies shared how even stepping into an empty courtroom left him feeling “shaky and teary-eyed.”

“It’s quite easy to see how people might be intimidated by the theatre of a courtroom, with judges in cloaks and barristers in wigs,” he said. “The more familiar you can become with it beforehand, the better prepared you are.”

He reflected on how, despite his academic background and experience as a diplomat, facing cross-examination proved to be a difficult challenge.

“I’m generally very comfortable with words and argumentation, and I don’t shy away from authority or well-educated individuals questioning me. Yet, I found the cross-examination to be an extremely challenging and distressing ordeal.”

Dr. Gould-Davies also emphasized the need for increased education for young people regarding courtroom proceedings.

“Every year, many individuals are touched by the justice system, yet their first interaction often occurs under severe stress and pressure.”

Ms. Waxman reiterated the necessity for alternative, remote locations arranged with the judiciary where vulnerable witnesses may provide their testimony without having to enter the courtroom.

She proposed the establishment of a Victim Care Hub, a reliable point of contact that would provide ongoing updates and answer any queries from victims.

In one instance, a victim was given incorrect court dates which resulted in her missing her testimony and subsequently led to the charges against the defendant being dismissed.

Violet remarked that a Victim Care Hub would be “an excellent initiative.”

“Having a trustworthy individual who possesses up-to-date information and is available when you need them to explain the process would be immensely valuable.”

However, implementing these reforms and upgrading technology would necessitate additional funding, raising concerns about their practicality.

Ms. Waxman recognized the challenging situation for victim support services, noting a cut of about 4% in funding.

“Yet if we continue to see high rates of victim withdrawals, this issue must be addressed. If victims do not engage with the justice process, we cannot achieve accountability for offenders, which ultimately endangers the public.”

Dr. Gould-Davies mentioned that these reforms could expedite trials or ensure they proceed as intended.

“Enhancing the efficiency of our congested court system not only serves justice but could also lead to cost savings.”

Violet advocated for increased funding for these new initiatives, stating, “If this truly is a priority, especially since the government claims it aims to halve violence against women and girls in the next decade, it’s time to follow through with financial backing.”