Diane Gall’s husband, Martyn, had been out on a morning bike ride with his friends on their usual route one winter morning in November 2020 – when he was killed by a reckless driver. 

Diane and her daughters had to wait almost three years for her husband’s case to be heard in court.

The case was postponed three times, often without warning.

“You just honestly lose faith in the system,” she says.

“You feel there’s a system there that should be there to help and protect victims, to be victims’ voices, but the constant delays really take their toll on individuals and us as a family.”

The first trial date in April 2022 was cancelled on the day and pushed four months later.

The day before the new date, the family were told it wasn’t going ahead due to the barristers’ strike.

It was moved to November 2022, then postponed again, before eventually being heard in June the following year.

“You’re building yourself up for all these dates, preparing yourself for what you’re going to hear, reliving everything that has happened, and it’s retraumatising,” says Diane.

‘Radical’ reform needed

Diane’s wait for justice gives us an insight into what thousands of victims and their families are battling every day in a court system cracking under the weight of a record-high backlog.

There are 76,957 cases waiting to be heard in Crown Courts across England and Wales, as of the end of March 2025.

To relieve pressure on the system, an independent review by Sir Brian Leveson last month made a number of recommendations – including creating a new division of the Crown Court known as an intermediate court, made up of a judge and two magistrates, and allowing defendants to choose to be tried by judge alone.

He said only “radical” reform would have an impact.

But according to exclusive data collected for Sky News by the Law Society, there is strong scepticism among the industry about some proposed plans.

Before the review was published, we asked 545 criminal lawyers about the idea of a new tier to the Crown Court – 60% of them told us a type of Intermediate Court was unlikely to reduce the backlog.

“It’s moving a problem from one place to another, like moving the deck chairs on the Titanic. It’s not going to do anything,” says Stuart Nolan, chair of the Law Society’s criminal law committee.

“I think the problem with it is lack of resources or lack of will to give the proper resources.

“You can say we need more staff, but they’re not just any staff, they are people with experience and training, and that doesn’t come quickly or cheap.”

Instead, the lawyers told us creating an additional court would harm the quality of justice.

Chloe Jay, senior partner at Shentons Solicitors, agrees the quality of justice will be impacted by a new court division that could sit without a jury for some offences.

She says: “The beauty of the Crown Court is that you have two separate bodies, one deciding the facts and one deciding law.

“So the jury doesn’t hear the legal arguments about what evidence should be excluded, whether something should be considered as part of the trial, and that’s what really gives you that really good, sound quality of justice, because you haven’t got one person making all the decisions together.

“Potentially in an intermediate court, that is what will happen. The same three people will hear those legal arguments and make the finding of guilt or innocence.”

The most striking finding from the survey is that 73% of criminal lawyers surveyed are worried about offences no longer sitting in front of a jury.

Casey Jenkins, president of London Criminal Court Solicitors’ Association, says this could create unconscious bias.

“There’s a real risk that people from minority backgrounds are negatively impacted by having a trial by a judge and not a jury of their peers who may have the same or similar social background to them,” she says.

“A jury trial is protection against professional judicial decisions by the state. It’s a fundamental right that can be invoked.”

Instead of moving some offences to a new Crown Court tier, our survey suggests criminal lawyers would be more in favour of moving cases to the magistrates instead.

Under the Leveson proposals, trials for offences such as dangerous driving, possessing an offensive weapon and theft could be moved out of the Crown Courts.

‘Catastrophic consequences’

Richard Atkinson, president of the Law Society, says fixing the system will only work with fair funding.

“It’s as important as the NHS, it’s as important as the education system,” he says. “If it crumbles, there will be catastrophic consequences.”

Ms Jenkins agrees that for too long the system has been allowed to fail.

“Everyone deserves justice, this is just not the answer,” she says.

“It’s just the wrong solution to a problem that was caused by chronic, long-term under-investment in the criminal justice system, which is a vital public service.

“The only way to ensure that there’s timely and fair justice for everybody is to invest in all parts of the system from the bottom up: local services, probation, restorative justice, more funding for lawyers so we can give early advice, more funding for the police so that cases are better prepared.”

Government vows ‘bold and ambitious reform’

In response to Sky News’ findings, the minister for courts and legal services, Sarah Sackman KC MP, told Sky News: “We inherited a record and rising court backlog, leaving many victims facing unacceptable delays to see justice done.

“We’ve already boosted funding in our courts system, but the only way out of this crisis is bold and ambitious reform. That is why we are carefully considering Sir Brian’s bold recommendations for long-term change.

“I won’t hesitate to do whatever needs to be done for the benefit of victims.”

The driver that killed Diane’s husband was eventually convicted. She wants those making decisions about the court system to remember those impacted the most in every case.

Every victim and every family.

“You do just feel like a cog in a big wheel that’s out of your control,” she says. “Because you know justice delayed is justice denied.”

A British man who allegedly tried to drown his daughter-in-law in a holiday swimming pool in Florida has been charged by police.

Mark Raymond Gibbon, 62, of Beaconsfield, Buckinghamshire, allegedly held the 33-year-old underwater repeatedly after they argued about his grandchildren.

He allegedly only stopped when a pair of sisters staying next door called the Polk County sheriff’s department.

The victim’s nine-year-old daughter also allegedly jumped into the pool to stop Gibbon from drowning her mother.

The family were staying at a rental home in the Solterra Resort of Davenport, Florida, when the incident occurred on Sunday, according to Sheriff Grady Judd.

Officers responded to reports of a disturbance in a pool at around 5.20pm local time.

Read more on Sky News:
UK airport reopens after plane incident
Reeves told big tax rises needed
Hiroshima survivor’s warning, 80 years on

“It’s great that Polk County draws visitors from all across the world, but we expect vacationers to behave while they visit with us, just as we expect our lifelong residents to do the same,” said the sheriff.

“Because Mr Gibbon couldn’t control his anger, he may find himself spending a lot more time in Florida than he had anticipated.”

Gibbon was arrested and taken to Polk County Jail, where he was charged with attempted second-degree murder and battery.

Nearly one in five doctors is considering quitting in the UK, new figures show, while one in eight is thinking about leaving the country to work abroad.

The General Medical Council (GMC), which commissioned the research, is warning that plans to cut hospital waiting lists will be at risk unless more is done to retain them.

By July 2029, the prime minister has said 92% of patients needing routine hospital treatment like hip and knee replacements will be seen within 18 weeks.

“[Poor staff retention] could threaten government ambitions to reduce waiting times and deliver better care to patients,” warned the authors of the GMC’s latest report.

The main reason doctors gave for considering moving abroad was they are “treated better” in other countries, while the second most common reason was better pay.

Some 43% said they had researched career opportunities in other countries, while 15% reported taking “hard steps” towards moving abroad, like applying for roles or contacting recruiters.

“Like any profession, doctors who are disillusioned with their careers will start looking elsewhere,” said Charlie Massey, chief executive of the GMC.

“Doctors need to be satisfied, supported, and see a hopeful future for themselves, or we may risk losing their talent and expertise altogether.”

Read more on Sky News:
Airport reopens after plane incident
Reeves told big tax rises needed
Hiroshima survivor’s warning, 80 years on

The report – which comes after a recent five-day walkout by resident doctors – is based on the responses of 4,697 doctors around the UK and also explores how they feel about career progression.

One in three said they are unable to progress their education, training and careers in the way they want.

Those who didn’t feel like their careers were progressing were at higher risk of burnout and were less satisfied with their work.

The GMC blamed workloads, competition for jobs, and lack of senior support for development for adversely impacting the career progression of UK doctors.

‘Legitimate complaints’

The Department of Health and Social Care acknowledged doctors had suffered “more than a decade of neglect”.

“Doctors have legitimate complaints about their conditions, including issues with training bottlenecks and career progression,” said a spokesperson.

“We want to work with them to address these and improve their working lives, which includes our plans set out in the 10 Year Health Plan to prioritise UK graduates and increase speciality training posts.

“This government is committed to improving career opportunities and working conditions, bringing in ways to recognise and reward talent – as well as freeing up clinicians’ time by cutting red tape.”