JUDGE Christopher Mitchell has seen it all in his courtroom during many years in the legal profession.

His day job is passing sentence on people’s futures and that responsibility is not lost on the judge who has just completed his first year as resident judge of Basildon and Southend Crown courts.

The 66-year-old said: “One does feel a responsibility to the people of Essex and one is conscious of the fact, especially when sentencing, that ordinary people have particular views.

“You have to some extent, although you are entirely independent, bear in mind what the public perception of offences is.”

Judge Mitchell took over from Judge Philip Clegg and says it has been an “interesting” year at court.

Explaining his role, he said: “As resident judge I do the normal judicial work in court, but also play a part in the general administration of the court service. At Basildon I have frequent contact with the court manager and the list officer. Resident judges have responsibilities to the judicial team at their court and also liaise with the Crown Prosecution Service and defence solicitors, and other bodies to ensure the smooth running of the court.”

The married judge, who lives in London, spent 33 years as a barrister and worked in both criminal and civil law, where he covered personal injury cases and employment tribunals.

In the 1990s he conducted two public inquiries when parliamentary boundaries had to be redrawn, and he also sat as an immigration adjudicator to deal with asylum cases.

Judge Mitchell went on to become a recorder and since becoming a full-time judge in 2003, has shared his time between Basildon and Southend Crown courts.

In the courtroom it is his job to decide on an appropriate sentence once a defendant is found guilty. Making that decision is now helped by the Probation Service, which prepares pre-sentence reports on offenders and may suggest a sentence with a community requirement.

These range from unpaid work, educational courses, regular drug testing, attending alcohol awareness courses to sexual offender courses for minor sexual offenders.

Judge Mitchell says these sentences are an alternative to an immediate prison term and are not a “soft option”.

If offenders fail to comply with any of the requirements imposed, they can be brought back to court and may be sent to prison. Judges are not bound by probation suggestions and a recommendation for a non-custodial sentence may be ignored, but something the probation officer has mentioned in the report might influence the judge to pass a shorter sentence than he originally considered.

Judge Mitchell said: “Obviously if you are going to pass a sentence, which on the face of it seems very lenient, there has to be good reason for doing so and you spell out the reasons.” It is this sentencing that causes Judge Mitchell the most difficulty. Judges have the task of not only punishing the defendant, but also rehabilitating them so they can go on to become useful members of society.

He said: “One thinks a lot about sentencing. Sentencing follows a plea of guilty or a finding of guilty by a jury. There are some sentences I do not find difficult.

“If someone goes and attacks someone else in their flat in the middle of the night with some kind of weapon they are going to get a substantial prison sentence.

“It is an appalling crime and I do not find I have any difficulty in sentencing defendants like that. It is really a question of how long.

“Similarly if someone is convicted or pleads guilty to sex abuse of children over a long period of time I have no problem. It will be a long sentence and if it is too long the Court of Appeal can reduce it.

“Very often you get a situation where someone is not necessarily wicked, but they have been silly.

“Looking at the guidelines he should go to prison, but has managed to get a good job, hold it down and there are letters from his neighbours saying what a great father he is. If you do not pass a prison sentence on him you are criticised. You are dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t.”

Another difficulty is when the courts come across offenders who generally cannot cope with life and drift into crime. They’ve been regularly in and out of jail and, even though judges try to help them by giving them community orders, they continually breach them.

Judge Mitchell said: “I find it sad. One does one’s best to keep people like that out of prison, but it is a terrible problem when they keep breaching their community orders.”

Judge Mitchell must also deal with offenders who have downloaded indecent images of children. The emotive subject often leads to calls for substantial sentences, but Judge Mitchell says that is not always the best solution.

He said: “In the cases where the pre-sentence report suggests it, one of the sex offender courses is the right way to deal with the case.

“The difficulty arises if the porn is particularly bad and the guidelines say he should go to prison for 12 months or something like that.

“There is very little opportunity to go on a sex offender course while in prison. For a defendant to go on such a course in prison, it really has to be a substantial sentence and you cannot pass that for downloading child porn.”

Judge Mitchell also said if the prosecution feels a judge has imposed an unduly lenient sentence it can appeal to the Court of Appeal in the same way a defendant can appeal against a sentence if he feels it is unduly harsh.

He said: “You have guidelines and authorities from the Court of Appeal. You have your view in the sentencing. You might feel a deterrent sentence is called for if there is violence or robbery on late night trains and an example needs to be made.”

On a final note the judge praised Essex Police for its professionalism saying it dealt with suspects firmly but fairly.