Skip to content

ADVOCATETANMOY LAW LIBRARY

Research & Library Database

Primary Menu
  • News
  • Opinion
  • Countries198
    • National Constitutions: History, Purpose, and Key Aspects
  • Judgment
  • Book
  • Legal Brief
    • Legal Eagal
  • LearnToday
  • HLJ
    • Supreme Court Case Notes
    • Daily Digest
  • Sarvarthapedia
    • Sarvarthapedia (Core Areas)
    • Systemic-and-systematic
    • Volume One
12/04/2026
  • Law

Vulnerable victims are allowed pre-recording of evidence under new protection measures in UK

The new technology allows vulnerable witnesses and victims to have their cross-examination video-recorded earlier in the process and played during the trial. This is to ensure they can provide their best evidence, away from the courtroom which many can often find intimidating.
advtanmoy 08/09/2020 4 minutes read

© Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • Share on WhatsApp (Opens in new window) WhatsApp
  • Share on X (Opens in new window) X
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window) Facebook
  • Share on Telegram (Opens in new window) Telegram
United Kingdom

Home » Law Library Updates » Sarvarthapedia » Law » Vulnerable victims are allowed pre-recording of evidence under new protection measures in UK

Vulnerable victims and witnesses have the option to pre-record their evidence.

DATE: SEPTEMBER 8TH, 2020

Vulnerable witnesses and victims are defined as all child witnesses under 18 and any witness who quality of evidence is likely to be diminished because they are suffering from a mental disorder or physical disability or has significant impairment of intelligence and social functioning.

  1. vulnerable victims and witnesses will have the option to pre-record their evidence, removing the need to attend the trial
  2. all Crown courts in London and Kent to offer this new protection
  3. new service to be available in every Crown Court by the end of 2020

The new technology allows vulnerable witnesses and victims to have their cross-examination video-recorded earlier in the process and played during the trial. This is to ensure they can provide their best evidence, away from the courtroom which many can often find intimidating.

Read Next

  • Law and Governance: History, Principles, and Institutions
  •  Judicial office is essentially a public trust: Supreme Court
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest (26th Jan 2026)

The recording is carried out as close to the time of the offence as possible in order to help memory recall, and reduce the stress of giving evidence to a full courtroom at trial.

The move follows successful pilots in Liverpool, Leeds, and Kingston-upon-Thames, where victims felt less pressure than attending court.

In November last year, a Primark security guard from Kingston-upon-Thames was jailed after the four girls he sexually assaulted gave their evidence in a pre-recorded session prior to the trial taking place. The victims were spared having to tell the story of their horrific abuse in front of the perpetrator, who showed no remorse for his actions.

Read Next

  • Law and Governance: History, Principles, and Institutions
  •  Judicial office is essentially a public trust: Supreme Court
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest (26th Jan 2026)

Justice Minister, Alex Chalk MP, said:

Vulnerable victims show great courage by coming forward, and it’s vital they can do so in the least traumatic way possible.

This technology ensures they are protected and are able to give their best possible evidence, without reducing a defendant’s right to a fair trial.

Read Next

  • Law and Governance: History, Principles, and Institutions
  •  Judicial office is essentially a public trust: Supreme Court
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest (26th Jan 2026)

But this is just one part of our efforts to boost the support on offer for victims at every stage of the justice system, which includes consulting on a Victims’ Law.

Victims’ Commissioner, Dame Vera Baird, says:

I very much welcome this further rollout ensuring that more vulnerable victims and witnesses have the option to pre-record their evidence. I have long been concerned that children who complained of victimisation should not spend a long part of their childhood beset with the worry of ultimately giving an account of what happened. If they can give their evidence at an early stage, they will then be free to get on with their lives. There is also a further point that therapy is often delayed whilst a complainant is a witness.

I congratulate HMCTS and the Ministry of Justice in driving this forward and being so responsive. The sooner these arrangements are in place the better. This has the potential to transform the criminal justice experience for so many vulnerable victims.

The decision to pre-record evidence is made by judges on a case-by-case basis.

Crown Courts in Basildon and Chelmsford, Essex, Lewes in East Sussex and Stafford in the West Midlands have started functioning.

Both the defence and prosecution lawyers will be present in court during the pre-recording as will the judge and the defendant.

Feedback from the courts already operating the system shows that victims felt less pressure and that witnesses were better able to recall events.

The full list of crown courts who have commenced pre-recording evidence sessions are:

  1. Basildon Crown Court
  2. Canterbury Crown Court
  3. Central Criminal Court
  4. Chelmsford Crown Court
  5. Croydon Crown Court
  6. Guildford Crown Court
  7. Harrow Crown Court
  8. Inner London Crown Court
  9. Isleworth Crown Court
  10. Lewes Crown Court
  11. Maidstone Crown Court
  12. Snaresbrook Crown Court
  13. Southwark Crown Court
  14. Stafford Crown Court
  15. Wood Green Crown Court
  16. Woolwich Crown Court

Pre-recorded video evidence is already available at Crown Courts in Aylesbury, Bradford, Bristol, Carlisle, Chester, Durham, Kingston-upon-Thames, Leeds, Leicester, Liverpool, Mold, Northampton, Oxford, Portsmouth, Reading, Sheffield, Swansea, Wolverhampton.

Last year a pilot project was commenced using the technology for intimidated witnesses (victims of sexual offences and modern slavery offences) in three Early Adopter Courts (Liverpool, Leeds and Kingston upon Thames). There may be wider rollouts to intimated witnesses pending the evaluation of this pilot.


Keyword: Intimidated witnesses-cross-examination-Victim protection

Tags: featured UK Victim Protection

Post navigation

Previous: দি.আর.দি.ও.না হাইপর্সোনিক তেক্নোলোজী দেমোন্সত্রেতর ভেহিকল মায় পাক্না ফ্লাইৎ চাংয়েং তৌখ্রে
Next: Victim Personal Statements and VPS process for Police, Investigator, Prosecution, and Cort in UK
Communism
Sarvarthapedia

Manifesto of the Communist Party 1848: History, Context, and Core Concepts

Arrest
Sarvarthapedia

Latin Maxims in Criminal Law: Meaning, Usage, and Courtroom Application

Scientific Principles: Theories, Inventors, Patents, Universities, Industrial Growth and Global Contributions

Abolition of Slave Trade Act 1807: Facts, Enforcement, and Historical Context

British Slavery and the Church of England: History, Theology, and the Codrington Estates

United States of America: History, Government, Economy, and Global Power

Biblical Basis for Slavery: Old and New Testament Laws, Narratives, and Interpretations

Rule of Law vs Rule by Law and Rule for Law: History, Meaning, and Global Evolution

IPS Cadre Strength 2025: State-wise Authorised Strength

Uric Acid: From 18th Century Discovery to Modern Medical Science

Christian Approaches to Interfaith Dialogue: Orthodox, Catholic, Protestant, and Pentecostal Views

Origin of Central Banking in India: From Hastings to RBI and the History of Preparatory Years (1773–1934)

Howrah District Environment Plan: Waste Management, Water Quality & Wetland Conservation

Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023: Sections (1-358), Punishments, and Legal Framework

  • Sarvarthapedia

  • Delhi Law Digest

  • Howrah Law Journal

  • Amit Arya vs Kamlesh Kumari: Doctrine of merger
  • David Vs. Kuruppampady: SLP against rejecting review by HC (2020)
  • Nazim & Ors. v. State of Uttarakhand (2025 INSC 1184)
  • Geeta v. Ajay: Expense for daughter`s marriage allowed in favour of the wife
  • Ram v. Sukhram: Tribal women’s right in ancestral property [2025] 8 SCR 272
  • Naresh vs Aarti: Cheque Bouncing Complaint Filed by POA (02/01/2025)
  • Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023 (BNSS)
  • Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam 2023 (BSA): Indian Rules for Evidence
  • Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) 2023
  • The Code of Civil Procedure (CPC)
  • Supreme Court Daily Digest
  • U.S. Supreme Court Orders
  • U.k. Supreme Court Orders
Sarvarthapedia

Scientific Principles: Theories, Inventors, Patents, Universities, Industrial Growth and Global Contributions

United Kingdom, UK

Abolition of Slave Trade Act 1807: Facts, Enforcement, and Historical Context

British Slavery and the Church of England: History, Theology, and the Codrington Estates

British Slavery and the Church of England: History, Theology, and the Codrington Estates

USA, America

United States of America: History, Government, Economy, and Global Power

2026 © Advocatetanmoy Law Library

  • About
  • Global Index
  • Judicial Examinations
  • Indian Statutes
  • Glossary
  • Legal Eagle
  • Subject Guide
  • Journal
  • SCCN
  • Constitutions
  • Legal Brief (SC)
  • MCQs (Indian Laws)
  • Sarvarthapedia (Articles)
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • FAQs
  • Library Updates