In co-operation with the HSE, local magistrates and partners from a couple of legal practices, IOSH South East branch organised a 'mock trial' in Kent on Tuesday 8.1.2013 which I attended. I found the dramatisation was a great opportunity to learn. What I found particularly useful were the explanation of the reasoning for their two 'Not Guilty!' verdicts by the magistrates and the comments afterwards by the local Principal Inspector of the HSE on his work in deciding whether to prosecute.

Quite unexpectedly, the proceedings cast the TUC briefing on Behavioural Safety, which you sent me last week, in quite a new light for me. In particular, what to some appears unvbalanced carping can be understood as the swing of a pendulum, when the advocate for the employer had little difficulty leading the 'CEO' of the defendant firm to answer 'Yes!' to the question, 'Do you think the accident which caused the injury was the fault of the employee?'.

I reread the TUC 2010 briefing on behaivoural safety again afterwards, in the context of the well-researched guide by LSE labour law researcher professor Hugh Collins ('Employment Law', Clarendon Press, 2nd edn, 2010), and have decided to develop a couple of statistical tools about safety stewardship. These tools are based on the values of co-operation, organisational citizenship and - the one not mentioned by the TUC unfortunately - competitiveness, and are designed to fuel reflection and conversations marked by listening and mutual understanding as well as constructive action research.

If any Tech IOSH, CMIOSH or CFIOSH involved in safety management in the real world wishes to make use of the tools as they are developed during the coming months, they can PM me with their contact details.

Any information shared aboutg safety management practices will be treated in strict professional confidence.

One of the solictors taking part - an Affiliate of the IOSH - mentioned during the lunchbreak that he understood that the transcript of this event is likely to be presented on the website of the IOSH South East Group sometime next month. So, to 'get' a copy, keep watching this section of the IOSH website. If it's not there by 28.2.2013, try emailing the secretary of the S E branch

This is the second 'mock trial' I've attended during the past year; the other was of an employment tribunal organised by the Kent branch of the CIPD. What they revealed included not only the fluency expected of witnesses but also the discretion of magistrates, and its limits, and how well they can explain the reasoning behind their questions to witnesses as well as their decisions.

KieranD, I too attended the trial with 9 other members of my organisation whose position includes HR, Director, safety rep and operative. While the verdict initially seems to be a “clear cut” guilty verdict based on the risk assessment “in question” and prosecutions brought under sections 1 & 2 of the HASAWA etc, 1974, I was surprised that the HSE didn't advocate for prosecution(s) under the Working at Height Regs. 2005 as the “mock” incident involved injury caused by working at height. However, as the day progresses with the proceeding, the magistrates explained that they arrived at the “Not Guilty” verdict to stimulate and engage debates among the participants on possible outcomes rather present a case where there is only one outcome. The feedback from my colleagues indicates that everyone found the day to be interested and has certainly change their perception in regards to how the justice system work when health and safety requirements has been breached and injury involved. All in all, these events can help to improve positive H&S Culture within organisations and I can honestly say I have seen a change of attitude toward health and safety in two of my supervisors who had attended the event.

(Readers, pardon my lack of more details on the incident and supported material as KieranD has mentioned previously, the transcript of the incident is pending for post on the site)

I would recommend a mock trial to anyone who is not likely to see the real thing. I attended one run by the Worcestershire Health and Safety Group and it was very enlightening.

LB

leadbelly's mention at #7 of the "real thing" prompts me to comment that OS&H practitioners with minimal or no experience of courtrooms should try to take available opportunities to observe how courts operate and how cases are conducted. Though it's obviously preferable to observe cases regarding OS&H matters, other types of cases will suffice. All courtrooms at Magistrates and Crown Courts (and their Scottish equivalents) have public galleries in which adult members of the public can sit and observe for as long or as little as they wish. However, members of the public can be excluded from a relatively few cases (or just parts of them) which deal with highly sensitive or confidential information and are classed as private ("in camera").

In fact, it's surely a good idea for all adults to go and observe in courtrooms in order to gain some awareness and understanding of them. Don't rely on TV dramatisations and media reports. This is especially so for anyone who has been summoned as a witness (or defendant!) and has never been in a courtroom before.

Though there's no charge for entering a court building (they're part of the UK justice system paid for by taxes), do note that everyone (including lawyers and apparently judges) entering - and their bags - are thoroughly searched in the same ways as aspiring passengers at airports. Some years ago an entrance scanner at a Crown court detected a small penknife I had forgotten to leave at home. It was promptly confiscated (for collection on leaving) and I was given a receipt on a small form which included standard advice in bold text regarding "your offensive weapon/s". Though I'm not revealing why I was at court, the receipt wording made me feel a bit guilty! :-)