Seòmar agus comataidhean

Thank you. Do Hannah Stakes or Sarah Ashby have any brief points?

We are coming up to our allocated time. I bring in our final member, Pauline McNeill, then give our panel members a chance to add anything else that they wish to.

It is just after 10 minutes to 1, and we are looking to run the evidence session until just after 1. A couple of members still want to come in but, before I bring in Russell Findlay, I will interject and cover an issue that we have not picked up this morning, which is anonymity for victims.

Assuming that you are supportive of the provision on anonymity for victims, are there ways in which you would like to see the proposals in the bill changed or strengthened—for example, in relation to the offences covered or the duration of anonymity? The issue was covered to a greater or lesser degree in some of your written submissions, but I would like to pick it up in committee.

That is helpful—thanks very much.

We heard a lot today about the significant benefit of survivors being part of the case, how important it is for them to have choice and control and how that might impact on convictions. That has been interesting.

On the issue of floating trials, which Rona Mackay picked up earlier, I would like some clarification. When we had the Lord Advocate before the committee last week, she expressed a desire that the use of floating trials for sexual offences cases be looked at, with a view to them not being part of the process for such cases. That was interesting to hear. From your engagement with survivors, do you have any further views to share on the use of floating trials and how difficult that can be for them? I go back to Sandy Brindley on that.

I will bring in Sharon Dowey in a moment, but I want to pick up on Sarah Ashby’s concern about judge-only trials. I was having a quick look through the submission from Rape Crisis Scotland, which has articulated things quite helpfully in respect of the scenario in which there is a judge only and no jury. It said:

“A written verdict could be a very positive development for complainers.”

In other words, if a case were to be heard by a judge only, they would have a responsibility to set out reasons for coming to the decision or the verdict that they came to. The submission goes on to say:

“A judge would be required to give reasons for a decision. Some survivors describe the lack of any explanation for a jury’s decision as distressing because it means they are never able to understand what happened.”

The written judgments from other cases seem to have added some weight to that.

Do you feel that such an approach might reassure survivors as to the merits of a judge-only trial? I am not putting words in your mouth; I am just interested in whether you feel that it might provide some reassurance.

Thank you, Hannah. That was well articulated.

I warmly welcome our second panel of witnesses. As I mentioned at the start of the meeting, it is very important to hear the views of survivors of sexual crimes who have personal experience of the criminal justice system, so the committee is interested in hearing your perspective on what is being proposed in the Victims, Witnesses, and Justice Reform (Scotland) Bill. On our second panel, we have Sarah Ashby, Hannah Stakes and Anisha Yaseen. Welcome to you all. We are very grateful that you have been able to join us this morning. I intend to allow around an hour for this session. If you would like to answer a question or come in on anything, please raise your hand or indicate to me and I will bring you in.

It might be helpful if I open with a question that I put to the first panel of witnesses, about trauma-informed practice. As you will know, the bill introduces a requirement that victims and witnesses

“should be treated in a way that accords with trauma-informed practice”.

Is that needed—and why?

Good morning and welcome to the second meeting in 2024 of the Criminal Justice Committee.

We have received apologies from Katy Clark, in whose place we are joined by Neil Bibby MSP. We are also joined by Maggie Chapman MSP, Ash Regan MSP, Tess White MSP and Rachael Hamilton MSP. Before we move on, I ask MSP colleagues who are joining us for the first time to declare any interests.

Thank you.

I will open up the meeting to questions from members. I ask for brief questions and fairly succinct responses, as we are tight for time.