WICL Mentoring: The Story So Far

- Amy Cox, Vice Chair and Head of Mentoring

When Women in Criminal Law launched in 2018 - with a fabulous turnout of people that even a snowstorm couldn’t keep away (in the words of our Founder and Chair Katy Thorne QC – it takes more than mere snow to stop us women!) - I stood on the stage, welcomed everyone, and said a few words about our idea for a mentoring scheme.

Two years on, the mentoring scheme has become a force to be reckoned with, and is central to the work of WICL. We have hosted a mentoring evening with advice and tips from mentoring expert Emily Cosgrove at The Conversation Space and four hugely successful mentoring breakfast events with speakers including HHJ Wendy Joseph. The WICL mentoring team has matched over 70 one-to-one mentoring pairs, and with assistance and advice from The Hon. Mrs Justice Bobbie Cheema Grubb, who was instrumental in designing the scheme, has created nine Judicial Mentoring Circles.

The idea of mentoring initially was to match one woman with another who was perhaps one or two steps ahead of her on her career path: a trainee with a newly qualified solicitor, a pupil barrister with a new tenant, a senior barrister with a QC. We didn’t want to be too prescriptive as to how the mentoring relationships would work and wanted the pairs to do what worked for them. Some pairs met once or twice in order to work towards a specific career goal such as a training contract or pupillage application, a promotion or an application for silk. Others have formed long-lasting and mutually beneficial relationships. We would not be able to make any mentoring matches without the selfless commitment of our mentors willing to give up their time, share their experiences, and perhaps allow other women to learn from their mistakes.

In reading the requests for mentors, I’ve seen great ambition within women, and with a mentor’s support and assistance have witnessed women achieving their goals. We have one mentor who has helped no less than three women through the pupillage application process, with ALL THREE being successful in their applications. The other side has been reading about the struggles of our members, whether it be gaining promotion, breaking into other practice areas usually dominated by men, or balancing work and family life. We’ve had some tear jerkers and it’s been an absolute pleasure to be able to offer those women support to help them move forwards.

Many WICL members tell us that they suffer with imposter syndrome. I could certainly relate to that when I went to the Royal Courts of Justice with Katy Thorne QC in order to meet Bobbie Cheema-Grubb for coffee to discuss the idea of judicial mentoring circles – I don’t even drink coffee, and how do I address The Hon. Mrs Justice Bobbie Cheema Grubb?! I needn’t have worried; she could not have been more welcoming, or generous with her time and advice.

There is a misconception that the Judicial Circles are only for people wanting to become judges. This isn’t the sole aim of the scheme, although I’m sure it’s hugely helpful for those who do. The groups offer circular mentoring, because we take the view that everyone, no matter what stage you are at in your career, can learn from others.

The groups are formed of five women – including solicitors and barristers, for the defence and prosecution, at different firms and chambers, and at different stages in their careers. Each group has found their own way, whether they meet for breakfast, after work, and for an hour or two, or a full evening of wine. During lockdown, which we know has been particularly hard for some women, our circles have taken to meeting via zoom – adding the odd little one to their circles!

Hearing a circle described as a ‘safe space’ is fantastic - we want women to be able to talk freely about anything; perhaps their aspirations to move firm or chambers, applying for promotion within their own firm, taking a break or changing direction, and any concerns they have. Most importantly, we want women to talk freely without fear of judgement or comment from peers at their own firm or chambers, friends who don’t understand the industry they work in, family who don’t understand why you don’t ‘just go for it’. The groups are about supporting and encouraging each other, becoming friends with others who have a completely impartial view on your life, will hear everything you have to say with no preconceived ideas or perceptions and will offer you advice, and if needed build your confidence. The icing on the top of the cake is that you’re not only receiving that advice and support from other women in the profession but also a judge who will tell you about her path, and in my experience that alone is truly inspirational.

We at WICL are enormously proud of the mentoring scheme, and we want to make sure that we support as many of our members as we can. If you would like to get involved, please get in touch with us at womenincrimlawmentoring@gmail.com. If you’re not sure if or how mentoring could help you, or whether you could be a suitable mentor for someone else (REMEMBER, you can be both!), get in touch for a chat about what might work for you. Finally, please spread the word to your fabulous women colleagues who might need that extra boost.

For all the info on WICL Mentoring, please visit: www.womenincriminallaw.com/mentoring

Making a Stand Against Judicial Bullying

The recent Supreme Court case of Serafin (Respondent) v Malkiewicz and others (Appellants) [2020] UKSC 23 again highlights the need for practitioners to take a universal stand against judicial bullying. Despite the availability of complaint mechanisms including SPOT (discussed below) this is harder than it seems. Advocates often appear before the same judge or district judge regularly and that judge holds a great deal of power both in relation to the outcomes for lay clients but also for that advocate’s career progression. We are a small profession where making a complaint can be frowned upon and people who do so are sometimes seen as ‘not one of us’. The fear of long-term consequences from speaking up are real and sadly often justified.

Judges who behave like this are the exception, but we all know that a few ‘bad apples’ can rot the barrel, a few well publicised instances of bullying or unfairness can fundamentally undermine public confidence in our criminal justice system, which is why this behaviour must never be tolerated or condoned. The Supreme Court has recently highlighted this in the Serafin judgment. In the Serafin case, the Court ordered a full retrial due to the behaviour of the judge towards a litigant in person. The judge is described as directing a ‘barrage of hostility’ towards the claimant and in so doing used ‘“immoderate, ill-tempered and at times offensive language”. The Court is driven to uphold the Court of Appeal’s conclusion that the judge did not allow the claim to be properly presented; that therefore he could not fairly appraise it; and that the trial was unfair. Instead of making allowance for the claimant’s being unrepresented, the judge “harassed and intimidated him”

This is powerful stuff and an indication of the increasing appetite within the judiciary itself, at the highest level, to address judicial bullying. But what can an advocate do when faced with this, before, during and after?

Before

Firstly, know your judge. An ill-tempered hostile judge is sometimes an ill-prepared uncertain judge. There are some judges who if you turn up early, well prepared and don’t make the fatal error of interrupting them (often taken as a personal affront) will be an entirely reasonable and fair tribunal, despite their fearful reputation.

If you know you are listed before a challenging tribunal prepare yourself and any client mentally and make full notes for any potential appeal. Remind yourself it is them and not you and be ready to respond as best you can.

Even if you would not normally do so, have full notes of the points you want to make, in case the barracking puts you off.

During

STAY CALM. The affront may seem personal, it may be unjustified, but at all costs, stay calm. It will get your respect from all present and be assured you have more allies in that court room than you think, even if they are too scared to speak.

Don’t react in kind and don’t be afraid to use silence. Sometimes you have to let a judge rant themselves out. I was recently on the wrong end of some unreasonable behaviour and after a period when I said nothing and waited for the storm to settle the judge commented he was going to take a 10 minute break and come back when he was no longer so frustrated with the technology and had calmed down. It was not an apology but as close as I was going to get to an acknowledgment that I was not the main source of his ire.

Do make the points you need to calmly and clearly, even if you are being interrupted. If your point is good even an unreasonable judge will sometimes hear it and begrudgingly change their stance.

If appropriate quote the above Supreme Court case – no judge likes being appealed on this ground.

Make notes, you may need evidence of the behaviour later.

If it is simply an inexplicable judicial meltdown from a judge under pressure, ask for a break or for the matter to be put back in the list. Judges are human, so are ushers and court clerks some of whom have been known to have a quiet and polite word with a judge who has inexplicably lost their temper on a bad day.

If a judge says something really bad, pause and perhaps ask them to repeat it saying you didn’t quite catch it and visibly make a note, including of the time on DARTS (if in the Crown Court). If they do repeat it and dig down at least you know for sure you need to report them.

If you are the opponent of someone being bullied by a judge don’t be complicit. If you are a prosecutor remember your duty of fairness, this sometimes involves advocating for a defendant and making it clear that you disagree with the judge even when they are acting in a way that is favourable to the prosecution.

Express solidarity with your opponent, a little email or note to your opponent saying they are doing well and to hold their ground, can help more than you imagine. Offer to be a witness if they choose to report it.

After

The fact of the matter is that sometimes you have to simply get through the hearing and then take the decision to make a report/appeal the matter. Indeed, often it is your professional duty to do so. This can be by way of a complaint to the Judicial Conduct Authority. The Bar Council however has recognised that this can be difficult, and that many people are reluctant to do this. They have therefore brought in the SPOT reporting system.

Details can be found at https://www.barcouncil.org.uk/support-for-barristers/equality-diversity-and-inclusion/talk-to-spot.html

It is a system the Bar Council has brought in to enable people to report anonymously incidents of bullying, harassment or discrimination. It is there to let you make a record when it happens, and receive a date and time stamped record, and if you agree for the record to go anonymously to the Bar Council Equality and Diversity team it enables the Bar Council to build up a picture of what is happening.

Disproportionate impact

WICL encourage all to speak up about the disproportionate impact of judicial bullying and the more subtle and insidious side to this. Not everyone sees that women, BAME advocates and other underrepresented groups face additional difficulties, but by talking about it we raise awareness. Some of your colleagues will deny there is a problem, don’t let that put you off. Know that there are many, including WICL mentors https://www.womenincriminallaw.com/mentoring who are more than willing to listen and support. Be part of the solution and not the problem and together we will make sure that the judiciary is a profession that does not tolerate ‘bad apples’.

With thanks to Diana Wilson of 9 Bedford Row.

The Impact of Covid-19 on Female Practitioners

Currently eleven weeks into a nationwide lockdown, many of us have been getting used to new ways of working. The swift move to remote hearings and Zoom socials (we have hosted some great Wellness Wednesday sessions if we do say ourselves) has minimised the disruption to our lives to some extent. However, whereas many women were able to leave their work life outside of the home, the new circumstances have forced the two to combine and, often, collide.

With schools across the country closing for non-critical workers, many women with caring responsibilities found themselves juggling working and schooling from home. The Next 100 Years project recently surveyed women in the legal profession. Nearly 40% of respondents had school age children at home. Of these, 91% report taking on extra childcare and homeschooling responsibilities with almost half of these indicating that they took on more responsibilities than their partner. 73% report that they are finding it hard to juggle and 32% have been forced to reduce working hours in direct response to this.

Figures such as these support the claim that the pandemic is having a disproportionate effect on women in the legal profession. Indeed, 65% of those surveyed indicated a concern that lockdown was exaggerating existing inequalities between men and women.

In an update to their 2019 ‘Back to the Bar’ report, the Western Circuit Women’s Forum (WCWF) has specifically considered how retaining women at the Bar will be impacted by Covid-19. With the ongoing global health pandemic further exacerbating issues such as the difficulty in balancing work and family commitments, their message to the Judiciary, HMCTS and Chambers is clear. Consider the Carers.

In all policy recommendations and procedural guidance issued, the potential effect on carers must be considered to ensure women in the legal profession are supported and accounted for. Already, we see women leaving the Bar at rates not mirrored by our male counterparts. Indeed, their 2019 survey noted that almost all of the men who left did so to retire or become judges, as opposed to the vast majority of women leaving mid-career. As it stands, the coronavirus pandemic looks set to amplify this trend, unless concrete action is taken.

WCWF recommends the Judiciary and HMCTS “take into account the practical difficulties faced by primary carers and people shielding the vulnerable”. This includes inviting advocates and other parties to indicate whether caring responsibilities might impact a hearing or future timetabling of a case. At this point, this information must be used to decide whether any “reasonable adjustments” are required to ensure a fair hearing. The implementation of reasonable adjustments is to be welcomed to ensure women with caring responsibilities are not forced into choosing between work and caring responsibilities during a period when they are considerable pressures on both.

To Chambers, ‘Support, Plan and Retain’ is the recommendation. It is advised that they take into account the practical difficulties faced by primary carers and people shielding the vulnerable during the pandemic. Suggestions on how to achieve this include maintaining active communication between clerks and barristers, echoing their voices to court staff and the judiciary about the need for greater notice and flexibility alongside ensuring all barristers have access to up to date guidance. WCWF particularly urges chambers to actively review the distribution of work to ensure those with caring responsibilities are not excluded. Acknowledging that those without caring responsibilities will be more available to take on last minute work, it should not be the case that those with are not considered at all, potentially leading to an unequal distribution subsequently affecting earnings and future briefs. We at WICL will be looking more into how this is monitored in criminal chambers, watch this space.

We welcome these recommendations by the WCWF and thank both them and the Next 100 years for shining a light on these issues. Our work at WICL Policy aims to continue monitoring the gendered effects of new guidance issued.

With thanks to Kitan Ososami.