Acknowledgements |
|
x | |
List of figures, charts and tables |
|
xi | |
Table of cases |
|
xiv | |
Table of legislation |
|
xv | |
Abbreviations and acronyms |
|
xvii | |
Preface |
|
xix | |
|
1 Designing for democracy: the geopolitics of the courthouse |
|
|
1 | (44) |
|
|
1 | (2) |
|
|
3 | (2) |
|
|
5 | (5) |
|
A jurisprudence of design |
|
|
10 | (6) |
|
|
11 | (5) |
|
From a jurisprudence of design to humane design |
|
|
16 | (3) |
|
Why does a critical approach to the architecture of law courts matter? |
|
|
19 | (2) |
|
|
21 | (2) |
|
Methodology and the microphysics of power |
|
|
23 | (3) |
|
The structure of the book |
|
|
26 | (6) |
|
|
32 | (1) |
|
|
33 | (3) |
|
|
36 | (9) |
Part I Towards a democratic courthouse |
|
45 | (64) |
|
2 The birth of a modern criminal justice system |
|
|
47 | (28) |
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
What problems were reformers seeking to solve? |
|
|
49 | (12) |
|
The state of the court estate in the 1970s |
|
|
52 | (4) |
|
Radical reform: a thirst for modernisation |
|
|
56 | (5) |
|
The reforming Lord Chancellor: Gerald Gardiner |
|
|
61 | (2) |
|
The logical scientist: Richard Beeching |
|
|
63 | (2) |
|
Transformation of the court estate |
|
|
65 | (2) |
|
|
67 | (1) |
|
|
68 | (4) |
|
|
72 | (3) |
|
3 A shift towards democratic courthouses? |
|
|
75 | (34) |
|
|
75 | (2) |
|
The balance between old and new |
|
|
77 | (2) |
|
|
79 | (4) |
|
|
83 | (11) |
|
|
83 | (5) |
|
|
88 | (6) |
|
|
94 | (3) |
|
The prison in the courthouse |
|
|
97 | (2) |
|
|
99 | (1) |
|
|
99 | (5) |
|
|
104 | (5) |
Part II Professional voices |
|
109 | (98) |
|
4 Moving targets: the challenges of the Beeching reforms for Whitehall |
|
|
111 | (34) |
|
|
111 | (2) |
|
A unity of all the talents? The Court Standards Working Party |
|
|
113 | (3) |
|
Scope for innovation: between a rock and a hard place |
|
|
116 | (6) |
|
Webs of influence and responsibility |
|
|
117 | (2) |
|
The immediate demand for courts |
|
|
119 | (3) |
|
The young pretender: expertise in the Lord Chancellor's Department |
|
|
122 | (8) |
|
|
130 | (2) |
|
A shifting political agenda |
|
|
132 | (1) |
|
|
133 | (2) |
|
|
135 | (5) |
|
|
140 | (5) |
|
5 Architectural agency in imagining the democratic courthouse |
|
|
145 | (29) |
|
|
145 | (2) |
|
Shying perceptions of the role of architecture in the public sphere |
|
|
147 | (1) |
|
A nexus of architectural discourse |
|
|
148 | (8) |
|
|
149 | (3) |
|
In house salaried architects |
|
|
152 | (2) |
|
|
154 | (2) |
|
The facilitation of architectural voice |
|
|
156 | (2) |
|
Constraints on the autonomy of architects and design excellence |
|
|
158 | (10) |
|
An incomplete professional project |
|
|
160 | (2) |
|
Towards standardisation of design? |
|
|
162 | (3) |
|
Aesthetic concerns as a costly nuisance |
|
|
165 | (3) |
|
|
168 | (1) |
|
|
169 | (2) |
|
|
171 | (3) |
|
6 The courthouse as machine: technocratic understandings of legal space |
|
|
174 | (33) |
|
|
174 | (2) |
|
The concept of a design guide |
|
|
176 | (1) |
|
|
177 | (6) |
|
Lexical units and taxonomies |
|
|
183 | (9) |
|
|
192 | (4) |
|
|
196 | (2) |
|
|
198 | (5) |
|
|
203 | (4) |
Part III Lay voices? |
|
207 | (132) |
|
7 Who was consulted? hierarchies of knowledge in the articulation of design principles |
|
|
209 | (30) |
|
|
209 | (2) |
|
A thirst for consultation |
|
|
211 | (1) |
|
|
212 | (18) |
|
|
213 | (8) |
|
Non-elite professional groups |
|
|
221 | (2) |
|
|
223 | (7) |
|
|
230 | (1) |
|
|
231 | (5) |
|
|
236 | (3) |
|
8 Danger and democracy: outsiders in the public sphere |
|
|
239 | (32) |
|
|
239 | (1) |
|
Placing the public in the courtroom |
|
|
240 | (11) |
|
|
251 | (3) |
|
Stranger danger in the courthouse |
|
|
254 | (4) |
|
Rendering proceedings opaque: sightlines in the courtroom |
|
|
258 | (4) |
|
The courthouse as fortress |
|
|
262 | (2) |
|
|
264 | (1) |
|
|
265 | (3) |
|
|
268 | (3) |
|
9 Docks and locks in criminal courts |
|
|
271 | (37) |
|
|
271 | (1) |
|
|
272 | (3) |
|
Diminishing facilities for the defendant |
|
|
275 | (5) |
|
Incarceration in the courtroom |
|
|
280 | (4) |
|
Rooms within rooms: the enclosure of the dock |
|
|
284 | (3) |
|
The advent of the 'secure dock' |
|
|
287 | (4) |
|
Mounting concerns about the dock |
|
|
291 | (5) |
|
|
296 | (2) |
|
|
298 | (1) |
|
|
299 | (5) |
|
|
304 | (4) |
|
|
308 | (31) |
|
|
308 | (2) |
|
Vanishing trials and vanishing courthouses |
|
|
310 | (1) |
|
Changes to who uses the litigation system |
|
|
|
|
311 | (3) |
|
|
314 | (1) |
|
The use of alternative venues for trials |
|
|
315 | (3) |
|
|
318 | (1) |
|
Towards a new jurisprudence of design |
|
|
319 | (1) |
|
|
320 | (10) |
|
The need to design for a distributed estate |
|
|
323 | (2) |
|
Consulting with lay users and allowing them to regulate virtual justice spaces |
|
|
325 | (5) |
|
|
330 | (2) |
|
|
332 | (2) |
|
|
334 | (5) |
Appendix: List of archival materials consulted |
|
339 | (4) |
|
The National Archives (UK) (TNA) (open access) |
|
|
339 | (2) |
|
TNA files - analysed as pertinent |
|
|
339 | (1) |
|
TNA files - analysed as not pertinent, or only marginally relevant |
|
|
340 | (1) |
|
Ministry ofJustice Archives (MoJ) (UK) (closed access) |
|
|
341 | (1) |
|
|
341 | (1) |
|
Further archival materials were consulted from the following collections |
|
|
342 | (1) |
Index |
|
343 | |