In the judge's file will be found:-- the charges;-- the witness and police statements (which in more complex cases will have been taken by the examining magistrate in examination in the magistrate's chambers, in certain cases during a confrontation between the various witnesses, the public prosecutor, the accused and his or her lawyer, as well as the civil complainant (vic tim of the crime), if appropriate, and his or her lawyers.French criminal procedure enables the victim to initiate the criminal process by filing a complaint with the police, public prosecutor or more often the juge d'instruction, and join in as a civil party.

The criminal court can award damages to the victim if it finds the accused guilty;-- the fiche penale of the accused containing photograph, finger prints, brief details of personal and family background, social worker's report (usually of a good standard), previous criminal convictions, details of preventive custody, and whether the person is a DPAC (detenu pour autres causes), that is, held in custody for other matters.The presiding judge will have read the file before the hearing and, particularly in cases where there has been no investigation by the juge d'instruction, will have prepared case notes so as to be able to conduct an examination of the accused, and relevant witnesses at hearing.

This is a form of summary investigation of the case.In suitable cases, the lawyers are well advised to have filed written pleadings for the defence in good time for the hearing, and it is a good sign if the judge indicates he or she has read your pleading.Here, it should be noted that it is relatively rare in Tribunal Correctionnel cases for the police or other prosecution witness to be examined, still less cross-examined.

It is possible to summon witnesses, but the sanction for non-attendance is only a fine.

Questions to witnesses must be put through the presiding judge.

Tactically, it is usually considered inadvisable to call police witnesses, except in very serious or difficult cases.

Attention is therefore focused on the difficulties, doubts and inconsistencies in the written file of statements taken by the police.The standard of proof in criminal cases is the judge's intime conviction or innermost feeling as to whether the accused is guilty or not.

Decisions are rendered on a collegial basis, even on appeal, there being no individual judicial opinions recorded.

The defence will therefore try to exploit every weakness or doubt appearing in the court file, if necessary by innuendo or insinuation, and where possible by emphasising the accused's good character record.The plea in mitigation will be made at the same time as the defence pleading, in case the court decides to convict.

The public prosecutor and the defence will have had access to the court file before the trial.

In theory, the defence lawyers may only have access to the file within 24 hours of the hearing and are supposed to pay a fee to the court clerk for each page copied.Fortunately, there is considerable tolerance in the way this archaic rule, which harks back to the time when the instruction process was secret, is operated.

However, the defence lawyer is not permitted to leave any copy of the statements in the file with the client, and may only discuss them with the client, quite often in the relatively difficult and uncomfortable conditions of the prison visiting room or court cells or in hurried court room consultation.The Toulouse Appeal Court recently held this rule was contrary to the European Convention on Human Rights, and found a lawyer not guilty of any offence by giving the client a copy of the examining magistrate's file so as to prepare the defence, thus endorsing fairly widespread practice.However, the Aix en Provence Appeal Court more recently disbarred a lawyer for having done so, amid howls of protest from the profession, but the decision was upheld on review of the point of law by the Cour de Cassation in Paris.THE HEARINGThe presiding judge told me that on most days the court hearing did not finish until at least 8pm and quite often went on until late into the evening, due to the large number of cases and insufficient numbers of judges.

It is indeed a feature of French public life both in the courts, universities and schools in particular, that the system only continues to function due to the dedication of a large number of underpaid state functionaries willing to work long hours, in the tradition of upholding republican life and ideals.

Judicial salaries are considerably lower than those of the English judiciary.The afternoon's hearing began with the swearing in of a court clerk of the industrial tribunal and the handing down of judgment in a case heard previously.The first case listed for hearing that afternoon was a complex case involving charges against a man and a woman of living off immoral earnings, which the court decided it could not take due to the overloaded list of cases for the afternoon.On hearing the judge's decision to adjourn the case to September, the woman accused broke down in tears, claiming she had been waiting for trial for three and a half years and that the conditions of bail prevented her from working.

(She was effectively prevented from engaging in any activity in a place open to the public).

The court nonetheless took the time to hear this aspect of the matter and amended the bail conditions to enable some commercial activity.The next few cases involved matters such as aggravated assault, or theft with violence (suitable for immediate summary trial -- comparution immediate) but were adjourned to enable the victim to file a civil claim for hearing at the same time.In each case, the court had to consider the question of preventive custody.

The accused already detained are brought in from the court cells (depot) handcuffed and attached by a chain to the police officers.A large, well built young man in imposing leather gear with a long standing scar from mouth to ear was charged with a kung-fu assault on a bus driver with a munchaku (the accused is brought up within a few feet of the judge, and handcuffs are taken off during examination by the court -- the judges told me afterwards that cases where the accused had assaulted members of the court were extremely rare).The accused was represented by the duty Avocat.

The judge asked the accused about his current situation: (unemployed, need for psychiatric treatment) and asked him to confirm the long list of previous convictions for assault, desertion, drunk driving.

The court felt it was appropriate to order the accused to be held in preventive custody, pending trial and to give the victim time to join in the proceedings.After several cases of a similar nature, a man who was the subject of a Court of Protection Order for the management of his affairs, but probably fit to plead, was heard concerning arson to a car and a shop.The man, who pleaded guilty was already well known to the court and had a drug addiction problem.

He was ordered to be detained in custody pending psychiatric reports, the case being adjourned for several months.Several other cases involving drug related or psychiatric problems were also dealt with, the court preferring preventive detention or custodial sentences, or in some cases compulsory psychiatric treatment with probation.

In one case involving a knife attack, the accused had pleaded guilty in his statement to the police, but had not appeared at the hearing.

He was sentenced to six months, and a n order for his arrest issued.The various decisions in this first batch of cases were taken during a 20 minute adjournment to chambers, at which I was invited to make any comment I felt might be useful.The court then moved on to deal with cases listed for trial.

The first case involved a charge of drug trafficking against an illegal immigrant from Tunisia.

The evidence consisted of an admission of heroin addiction, possession of drugs in relatively small quantities, a set of kitchen scales and payments of cash into a bank account which the accused was unable to explain satisfactorily on oral examination by the president.The Public Prosecutor asked the court to convict on the basis of necessary implication of dealing due to the presence of the kitchen scales, and to sentence the accused to eight months in prison.The duty Avocat referred the court to the recent conviction of Francoise Sagan, the famous novelist, for drug possession when she was sentenced to a one year suspended sentence for a second offence.

He then asked the court to be lenient.

The man was sentenced to six months in prison.After hearing two more cases, the court adjourned at 7.30 -- everyone was happily surprised that we had finished so early.