Exploring the Boundaries of the Criminal Courtroom Workgroup

Abstract

The concept of the courtroom workgroup has become a standard way of explaining patterns of decisions produced by, and dynamics within, criminal trial courts in common law jurisdictions. Many such explanations are, however, based on a superficial use of the concept that overlooks its analytical richness. The present contribution aims to address this by suggesting ways in which it might be used more fruitfully. In particular, it is argued that linking the concept to social theory will bring into focus the kind of methodological strategies necessary to understand what matters to members of courtroom workgroups, and how these commitments are linked to actual practice. The arguments are illustrated by reference to some original data from a study of legal aid decision-making in the magistrates' courts of Northern Ireland. Attention is focused on how judges and lawyers patrolled, explored and challenged the boundaries of workgroup norms and practices. Such boundary-work is shown to provide insights into the interdependent relationships that characterize the lower criminal court workgroup.