“The defendants have relentlessly attacked each other… exposing themselves in the process…”

These words echoed through the courtroom as Mr Jonathan Ingram stood to make his speech as prosecutor. An independent barrister, instructed by the Crime Prosecution Service (CPS) to prosecute, Mr Ingram’s speech was the suspenseful denouement of a days’ long trial, the climax of the narrative structure for the jury audience. Now it was time for the jury to decide the conclusion in this Freytag’s Pyramid of adjudication.

As someone who had mainly surrounded myself with the world of corporate law and solicitors, this scene was mainly novel to me, literally and figuratively as I had only witnessed a speech as such in news and literature. Whilst I had an outsider’s experience with the Bar, in previous years, I had not confronted the innate innings of the field. It was perchance that I had ended up on a friend’s mini-pupillage observation of this trial - but from the moment I had clamoured into the tense courtroom… I was hooked.

It was a three day long inquisition into finding out the involvement of two defendants who vehemently denied knowledge of their charges. High intensity vibrated through the walls of the Crown Court as accusations and expositions flew around the room - simultaneously with the verbatim of the defendants’ statements being exacerbated during evidential cross examination. All whilst the judge and jury looked on. Sitting in the row behind Counsel, I meekly sat, eyes jumping from judge to jury, trying to telepathically decipher each of their judgement - but stone cold poker faces dominated the judicial arena.

It was then that I questioned, as one stands up in front of judge and jury to make their emphatic claim - decisive in the present fate of a defendant’s life - what is it like from a prosecutor’s perspective?

Jonathan Ingram’s Perspective:

1. What is a trial like from the prosecutor’s perspective?

The prosecutor’s duty is primarily to present their case fairly, ie: within the rules. The burden of proof remains on the prosecution - the defence don’t have to prove anything. Therefore the case depends principally on the reliability of the witnesses. Of course if the defendant does give

evidence then the jury can take it into account. There is no requirement to obtain a conviction at all costs. Proper presentation counts and the ability to expose lies told by the defendant by cross-examination. There is always a theatrical element, as tensions rise and fall and each case has a story to it. At the end of the evidence the prosecution closing speech can throw light on that evidence in a persuasive manner.

2. What was your ‘calling’ to the Bar?

My experience in Social Work made me aware of many injustices in the community. I was regularly frustrated by my failed attempts to make any changes for my clients. Coming up against bureaucratic, financial and political obstacles that were irrelevant as far as my clients’ predicaments were concerned. I thought that I would have greater effect as a lawyer. I can’t say that a life of crime achieved that, but it has been much more fulfilling than Social Work! I was called in July 1984.

3. What challenges have you faced in your journey?

I left university at the end of my first year to spend 9 months travelling overland to India in 1974. When I returned, I spent 3 years working in Social Services before I started my law degree as a mature student (aged 25).

4. What was one of the best moments of your career?

After my law degree I enrolled in the Solicitors Finals course. Halfway through I realised that it was not for me and made the best decision of my career to swap to the Bar Finals (in those days full grants were available for mature students!)

5. What advice would you give to those thinking about a career at the Bar?

It is a wonderful career in the end. But the start can be very rocky. The first hurdle is getting a pupilage, then a tenancy, then building a practice. At the beginning your relationship with Chamber’s clerks will fundamentally affect how your practice develops. If you intend to practice in Crime - the first 5 years are difficult, because Magistrates Court work doesn’t pay well. But once your practice takes you to the Crown Court, then the work is more enjoyable and better paid. In my whole career I’ve never had a dull moment!

Questions answered by Jonathan Ingram

Introduction by Saffron-Lucia Gilbert-Kaluba (Co-Founder of The Corporate Law Journal)

Jonathan Ingram: A Prosecutor's Perspective