A judge refused to put off the trial of two men accused of a slashing in Wantage after prosecutors had lost contact with one of their alleged victims, who was believed to be in Switzerland.
But just days later, Judge Ian Pringle KC was forced to adjourn the trial for a whole year, as there were no judges free or courtroom space available to hear the case this week.
And the judge, who as the most senior judge at the St Aldates crown court has the honorary title of Recorder of Oxford, granted an application by the Oxford Mail for automatic press restrictions to be lifted to allow the reasons for the adjournment to be reported.
READ MORE: Oxford jury told of 'child sex abuse ring' in early 2000s
The two defendants, who we are not naming to avoid prejudicing their upcoming trial, face allegations of a serious wounding in Wantage that dates back to November 2021.
The men, both from Swindon, were originally due to stand trial in September 2022, but the case was adjourned as a result of the barristers’ strike over Legal Aid rates.
Last Friday, three days before the trial was due to begin, the Crown Prosecution Service asked for the case to be taken out the list.
Prosecuting, Alice Aubrey-Fletcher said the authorities had lost contact with one of the two alleged victims. He was believed to be in Switzerland.
“This information came to light some time ago; in January this year,” she said.
Oxford Mail readers can NOW sign up for an online subscription for just £1 for one month or get 15 per cent off an annual subscription in this limited offer.
— Oxford Mail (@TheOxfordMail) September 13, 2023
Don't miss out! Full details can be found here 👇https://t.co/X7IOnawrD3 pic.twitter.com/LQlTkCrm8o
“The case has been without counsel [a barrister] for some time.
"New counsel was instructed on September 4 and a conference was held with the reviewing lawyer on that date and it was at that point identified that this work needs to be done.”
It was conceded that little had been done to find the missing man since the information came to light in January.
Judge Pringle refused the application to take the trial out of the list, known in legal terminology as ‘breaking the trial fixture'.
He told the barristers: “Basically, virtually nothing has happened in this case despite the fact [the prosecution have] been in difficulties, really, for a considerable period of time. Some six to eight weeks is asked for.”
The judge added: “I’m sorry, I think we’re much too far down the road for that [an adjournment].”
But in a twist, when the case returned to court on Monday (September 12) there was no court space and no judge available to hear the trial.
As a result, the trial was adjourned until September 9 next year, two years after the first – abandoned – trial and almost three years after the alleged attack.
READ MORE: Motorcyclist suffers serious injuries in crash
Following the hearing, Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor Peter Burt of the Crown Prosecution Service said: “When efforts earlier this year to locate one of the [alleged] victims in this case were unsuccessful, we built the case for trial based on evidence from a second victim and other witnesses.
“We made an application to move the trial date to provide some more time to find the missing victim. However, we remained ready to prosecute the case without that victim, if this application were to be refused. The application was made in advance of the trial date.
“On refusal of the application, we were ready to proceed with the witnesses who were available to attend court the following week.”
He said it was unfortunate that the court could not accommodate the trial this week, with the matter put off until next year.
“We recognise that this news will be difficult for the victims and witnesses in this case and, with the police, we will continue to support them until the trial takes place,” Mr Burt added.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article