I haven’t slept properly since the Government mentioned abolishing jury trials for some offences. This is not because juries are perfect – they’re not- but because they’re the only form of oversight within the justice system.  When I first started speaking out about the judges’ lack of accountability a couple of years ago, I did so because of something my family lived through and something that opened my eyes to a problem I never knew existed. Most of the public don’t know about this either.

A survivor’s open letter urging government not to use court delays to justify removing the right to a jury

By Vicki

As debate grows around limiting jury trials, Vicki offers a vital perspective from lived experience. Her open letter sets out clearly why her case must not be used to justify removing the right to be tried by a jury.

The recent debate on restricting jury trials has focused on so-called “lower level” offences to allegedly relieve the waiting times for the more serious crimes. But that’s not where the real crisis sits. The greatest inconsistency - the greatest injustice - occurs in rape and sexual violence cases, where juries are asked to evaluate crimes, that they fundamentally do not understand.

On 1 October, BBC Panorama aired a devastating investigation into the Metropolitan Police. For seven months, an undercover reporter worked inside Charing Cross police station in central London, capturing on camera what many survivors, campaigners, and community advocates have long suspected: misogyny, racism, and abuse of power are not relics of the past - they remain deeply embedded in parts of Britain’s largest police force.

In the labyrinthine UK justice system, some legal defences are so unusual that they seem almost surreal. “Sexsomnia” -  a rare sleep disorder that allegedly causes people to engage in sexual acts while unconscious - is one of them.

Once confined to obscure medical journals, sexsomnia has entered both criminal and family courts with alarming frequency.