On 24 February 2026, the Secretary of State for Justice and Deputy Prime Minister, David Lammy MP, laid out his vision for the future of the courts at Microsoft’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) tour, with a view to reducing the courts backlog. 

Key provisions outlined in his speech included: 

• Unlimited sitting days in the Crown Court next year

• Changing the threshold for jury trials, with the introduction of a new “Swift, Bench Division” of the Crown Court for certain cases, where judge-only trials will be used for cases likely leading to sentences of up to three years

• Enabling more ‘blitz courts’, where similar cases are listed together over short periods to concentrate court resources

• Piloting a new AI listing assistant for judges, that processes all the information and data available to the judiciary, to assist them to make more intuitive listing decisions. 

Within the recent flurry of announcements focused on reforming the justice system, including the Sentencing Act, reforms to policing, and the youth justice system, T2A continues to be concerned about the lack of a young adult-focused framework within these provisions.  

Any steps to reform the justice system through ‘swifter justice’, and meaningfully divert young adults away from cycles of crime, must take into account and include: 

• A specific framework for sentencing young adults aged 18-25, recognising that they have not reached full maturity 

• Mandatory written pre-sentence reports for all young adults 

• Training for legal professionals and sentencers, both within the Magistrates and Crown Courts, on the needs and experiences of young adults 

• Greater emphasis on deferred prosecutions for young adults, in line with increased usage outlined in the Sentencing Act 

• Consideration of traumatic brain injuries (TBI) and neurodivergence, which are highly prevalent amongst young adults caught up in the criminal justice system. 

A specific framework for sentencing young adults 

T2A has long called for a distinct statutory framework for young adults in the justice system, one that reflects what the science has made clear for decades: the brain continues to develop actively until at least the mid-twenties. This is not a peripheral finding. It means that many young adults who come before the courts have not yet fully developed the cognitive capacities that underpin sound decision-making – including impulse control, risk assessment, and the ability to weigh long-term consequences. These are not character failings. They are developmental realities. Yet the current sentencing framework treats an 18-year-old as indistinguishable from a 40-year-old. The result is sentences calibrated to punish rather than to change, and the evidence is unambiguous that punishment alone does not reduce reoffending. What does work is a framework that takes maturity seriously and assesses the developmental stage at the point of sentence, builds in structured opportunities for review as a young person grows and changes, and prioritises the conditions for desistance over the logic of containment. That is better for victims, better for communities, and better for public safety. 

Mandatory written pre-sentence reports for all young adults 

Pre-sentence reports (PSRs) are assessments prepared by the Probation Service to help sentencers determine an appropriate sentence, featuring relevant information about the person and the reasons why a particular sentence (i.e. community or custodial) could be effective. Research shows that those who receive a PSR are more likely to complete their court order, and the assessment of a young adult’s maturity and capacity to engage in desistance with a particular sentence is crucial to enabling young adults to rehabilitate. It was, therefore, disappointing to see the 2025 Sentencing Guidelines direction that young adults should receive a PSR struck off in amendments. T2A remains committed to probation services completing pre-sentence reports on all young adults, including an assessment of their maturity, with a clear direction to the court on an effective age-appropriate sentencing response. Any steps to use AI to speed up court processes should consider how pre-sentence reports can be included in moves to innovate. 

Training for legal professionals and sentencers, both within the Magistrates and Crown Courts, on the needs and experiences of young adults 

The neuroscientific evidence on brain development is only useful if the people making decisions about young adults in the criminal justice system actually understand it. At present, too few do. T2A is calling for mandatory training on maturity and adolescent development for prosecutors, defence lawyers, and sentencers, not as an optional professional development exercise, but as a baseline competency for anyone working with this age group. The stakes are high. Analysis of court judgments has found that maturity was applied as a mitigating factor in only 28 per cent of cases involving defendants aged 18 to 21, and just 6 per cent of those aged 22 to 29, despite clear Sentencing Council guidance when making sentencing decisions on age and lack of maturity as relevant considerations.  

T2A’s own research on magistrates’ courts found that awareness and application of maturity as a mitigating factor remains inconsistent and often absent. This is not a matter of interpretation. It is a pattern of routine disregard for existing guidance. Prosecutors need the tools to assess maturity when weighing culpability. Defence lawyers need the knowledge to raise it effectively. Sentencers need to understand how developmental immaturity shapes decision-making and to apply that understanding consistently. A legal system that takes maturity seriously would not only deliver fairer outcomes, but it would also deliver faster ones, by cutting court processing times and lead to swifter justice: a clearer shared framework reduces the procedural uncertainty that slows cases down and drives up costs for everyone. 

Greater emphasis on and use of deferred prosecutions for young adults, as outlined in the Sentencing Act 

For many young adults, the moment of arrest or charge is also a moment of potential turning point but only if the system creates the conditions for change rather than immediately foreclosing them. T2A supports a much greater use of deferred prosecution for young adults, particularly for lower-level offences. Deferral creates space: time for support services to engage, for underlying needs to be addressed, and for the young person to demonstrate the kind of positive change that a rushed process would never allow to emerge. This is not softness on crime. It is realism about how change actually happens especially for young adults carrying the weight of adverse childhood experiences, trauma, or unmet mental health needs. The Sentencing Act provides the legislative basis for this approach, and the 2017 Lammy Review called for exactly this kind of presumption. A system serious about reducing reoffending would use every available tool to interrupt the pathway into deeper criminal justice involvement before it becomes entrenched. Deferred prosecution, used consistently and supported by wrap-around services, is one of the most cost-effective ways to do that. 

Consideration of traumatic brain injuries (TBI) and neurodivergence 

Neurodivergence and neurodisability are not marginal characteristics in the young adult justice system, they describe the majority of those within it. Research shows that traumatic brain injury alone affects between 50 and 80 per cent of people in prisons, while over 60 per cent of young people in the criminal justice system present with speech, language and communication needs, and approximately 30 per cent on young adults in prison present with ADHD. Despite these figures, the young adult estate has no equivalent of the systematic screening tool used in youth custody, as the Comprehensive Health Assessment Tool stops at 18, and nothing replaces it. The consequence is predictable and well-documented; behavioural presentations rooted in trauma, neurodivergence, and unidentified brain injury are routinely misread as deliberate non-compliance, generating disciplinary responses – adjudications, segregation, extended custody – that compound harm rather than address its origins. 

Both neurodivergence and neurodisability can and should be a mitigating factor in sentencing, but that depends entirely on it first being identified. T2A is calling for universal mandatory screening for neurodivergence, neurodisability, traumatic brain injury, and adverse childhood experiences across all custodial settings holding young adults, and for this to be embedded within a reformed sentencing framework that requires assessment of need before sentence is passed. This is not a welfare add-on. It should be a basic precondition for any system that is serious about reducing reoffending. 

Looking forward 

Overall, T2A understands the push towards swifter justice, but urges caution in not needlessly pushing young adults further into cycles of crime through directives to cut processing times. The move towards improving experiences, services and outcomes for victims is a welcome and necessary development that will resonate with everyone and draw broad support, but it must be held alongside an equally important truth that the majority of young adults caught up in the criminal justice system are themselves victims – of abuse, neglect, exploitation, poverty, institutional failure, and violence – often long before they caused any harm to others.  

These are not competing facts. They are the same story, told from different points in the same life. A truly effective and fair justice system must be willing to hold both truths at once. Real accountability for the harm caused, and genuine care for the harm suffered. To address one whilst ignoring the other is simply not justice at all. Justice for everyone ultimately means focusing on prevention and reducing reoffending, and we hope that in further steps to modernise the justice system, the Secretary of State will refer back to recommendations made in his 2017 Lammy Review, that needless criminalisation is an injustice in itself.  

“These disproportionate numbers represent wasted lives, a source of anger and mistrust and a significant cost to the taxpayer […] The review was established to ‘make recommendations for improvement’ […] It reflects a growing sense of urgency, across party-political lines, to find solutions to this inequity.” – David Lammy MP

T2A calls on the Government to take this window of opportunity for reform to reimagine and rethink justice for young adults. It is significant that the Justice Committee has called an inquiry into young adults (and children) in the secure estate – the first time it has focused on young adults since 2016 – and T2A hopes that the recommendations that emerge from this will be actioned in a timely way. 

As we start the new year, the chair of the T2A Alliance Leroy Logan MBE reflects on a key 2022 report from Sheffield and Manchester Universities: Young adults in court: shrinking numbers and increasing disparities

A recent report from the Sheffield and Manchester Universities found that, over the last ten years, the number of young adults appearing in court has reduced significantly. In theory, this news should be warmly greeted, but the factors behind this reduction are not yet fully clear.

And while the rate of custodial sentences among young people has fallen by 40%, it’s still twice as high as for those over 24 years of age – and 12 times higher than for those who are under 18.

Young adults continue to be over-represented in the criminal justice system, and that’s why it’s crucial that we employ a distinct approach to their unique needs. When we get these interventions right, we know that young adults are less likely to reoffend and have a better chance of making a positive start to life after release.

The report authors, Nathan Hughes and Todd Hartman, also highlighted the widely varying rates of court appearances across England and Wales. In 2017-18, 8.4 per one thousand young adults in Devon and Cornwall made a court appearance. By contrast, the rate of appearances in the area covered by the Metropolitan Police was 23.1. What is causing this disparity in rates?

Unfortunately, insufficient data is available to compare the practices of different areas. If regional data was recorded in more detail, we could better understand the variations in local practice – and how these learnings could be applied nationally .

Race and ethnicity featured prominently in the report too. Hughes and Hartman found that ‘non-white’ young adults are now appearing in court and being sentenced to immediate custody at 1.7 times the rate of ‘white’ young adults. What’s even more concerning is that this gap has grown in the last ten years.

It’s equally challenging to understand the full picture here as data on ethnicity only started to be recorded in 2009-10, and the population size of each ethnic group is estimated – hence the use of the imprecise terms, ‘white’ and ‘non-white’, in this report. The authors quite rightly call for more robust monitoring of data on ethnicity, which T2A fully supports.

It’s only with access to this data that we can begin to properly address the significant disadvantages faced by young Black and minority ethnic adults. Here at T2A, we remain committed to ending the racial disparities that impact the lives of young people in the criminal justice system. They deserve much better, and we will continue to do everything we can to achieve this.

Young adults in court: shrinking numbers and increasing disparities

Read the full report

Academic Jenni Ward at Middlesex University has published a paper which argues for specialist young adult courts that would ensure distinct and age-appropriate sentencing for young adults.  

Ward believes this model would allow for developmental maturity to be considered with more consistency across the court sentencing system. Carrying over the welfare focus from the youth justice system would foster a greater focus on long-term rehabilitation and reduce re-offending. 

She found that young adults may be disadvantaged when tried by an adult justice system as they are faced with complex legal processes and terminology – making it challenging for them to actively participate and understand what is going on.  

Citing international research conducted on the experiences of young adults in Hong Kong courts, Ward says: 

“The young adults were often confused by the language and unaware of the implications of certain complex legal decisions tasked to them.” 

Ward goes on to explore other international examples of young adult courts, including in New Zealand and Brooklyn, New York. An evaluation of the ‘Brooklyn Young Adult Initiative’ found encouraging results with participants of this programme less likely to receive prison sentences than the comparison group (2% v. 13%) going through the traditional court system, and more likely to consider the outcome of their case was fair. No evidence was found that public safety was compromised. 

Considering the growing evidence, Ward believes the time is right to test a young adult court in the criminal justice system of England and Wales. 

“It is evident that young adult courts by their tailored design are better able to account for the realities of (im)maturity of 18-25-year olds than standard courts and the social risks linked to difficult family and criminogenic environments can be addressed within this dedicated young adult model.” 

Criminal Court Sentencing: The Case for Specialist Young Adult Courts

You can read Jenni Ward’s full paper in the British Journal of Criminology.

[Please note this article is behind a pay wall]

Read more

T2A welcomes a new report from Sheffield and Manchester Universities which finds that over the last decade the number of young adult court appearances have dramatically decreased.  However, we are concerned about data which indicates a disparity between white and non-white young adults. Although rates for non-white young adults have also decreased, they have not decreased at the same rate. The blog below by criminal justice researcher Roger Grimshaw, unpicks what might be behind those disparities and highlights the need for further research.

Roger Grimshaw on the implications of a new study highlighting the long term reduction in young adult prosecutions.

New findings today from the Universities of Sheffield and Manchester have highlighted long term trends in court appearances for young adults. ‘Young adults in court: shrinking numbers and increasing disparities’, as the title suggests, shows young adults have become far less likely to appear in court over the previous decade. However, the data imply that prejudice against minorities has led to unequal rates of court appearances and custody for non-white young adults.

This concise study presents tantalizing opportunities for further exploration of the factors behind the changes. It is therefore worth rehearsing the main points in some detail before reflecting on their significance.

A decade of data

In England and Wales, the rate of court appearances among young adults (aged 18–24) fell by three quarters, from 32 court appearances per thousand young adults in 2007–08 to 8 per thousand in 2018–19. This reduction predates the impact of court closures due to COVID restrictions. It also exceeded the decline in court appearances for older age groups. The custody rate in general for young adults has also declined but remains relatively high -twice as high as for those over 24. The drops have occurred across a range of offences, including theft, burglary, violent and sexual offences, and criminal damage. Significantly the proportion of appearances for drug-related offences has increased.

The broad trends are echoed in figures published by the Youth Justice Board which reports that the number of occasions when young adults (aged 18-20) were sentenced decreased by 58 per cent between 2010 and 2020; however, the Board’s figures do not take account of a significant fluctuation in population, which the current study usefully addresses.

The data in the new study also indicate different – and harsher – treatment of minorities by police and courts.

By 2017–18, the rate for ‘white’ young adults had fallen to 11 court appearances per thousand – a reduction of 63 per cent. However, the rate among ‘non-white’ young adults stood at 22 court appearances per thousand – a reduction of 46 per cent but still much higher than for ‘white’ young adults. Custody rates also differed: the rate of immediate custody for ‘white’ young adults declined by 62 per cent, whereas for ‘non-white’ young adults it fell by 53 per cent.

Possible factors

The scope of the changes indicate that something important has been going on – but what? For some, it might be tempting to speculate about a new generational morality, but according to the researchers, crime has not fallen proportionally. The likelier explanations are institutional.

In assessing general contextual factors, it will be worth looking at the impact of court closures, and a reduction in police numbers. In particular, when annual recorded crimes are considered, the rates of charging/summons have declined substantially over the last seven years.

Moreover, the study shows significant geographical differences. The Metropolitan Police area showed relatively less decline, leading to it having the highest current rate of court appearances by young adults.

To shed more light on the key generational difference, the authors’ hunch is to explore the long-term effects of earlier criminal justice processing on young adult outcomes.

Here we should examine, first of all, what has happened to the recent cohorts which have experienced a systematic fall in interventions and a rise in diversionary practices. Long term reductions in the numbers of first time entrants to criminal justice have been dramatic: the rate per 100,000 of the 10–17 year-old population was 1,929 in the 12 months to the end of June 2007 and 484 to the end of June 2013. The introduction of Community Resolutions and triage systems may have played some part in these trends. However, ominously, the proportion of first time entrants who were categorised as ‘black’ rose over the same period.

Steady declines in sanctions have occurred over the recent decade, and in the year ending March 2020, 82 per cent fewer children received a caution or sentence than in the year ending March 2010.

In broad terms, the historical patterns of first time entrants and sanctions form a plausible starting point for understanding the changes in court appearances observed among young adults.

Discrimination

A crucial element in the apparent prejudice directed at ‘non-white’ young men is likely to be broad-brush attributions – open or tacit – of dangerousness. Our study of homicide prosecutions also confirmed the enduring salience of group prosecutions brought against young black men.

The rhetoric of ‘gangs’ casts a wide net of association, inflating the seriousness of any charge or court appearance. The growing role of drug offences in court proceedings involving young adults may reflect the stereotyping of a generation of young black men allegedly under the sway of a violent drug market.

It is vital that the police, the CPS and the courts develop clear and rigorous policies which enable them to weigh the available case information fairly and impartially, dismantling both ‘postcode’ and racial stereotypes.

Institutional influences

Though it is too soon to be certain, any specific changes in policy towards young adults that may have occurred seem to have been over-ridden by a confluence of institutional factors operating at a system level.

The long term effects of reduction in youth justice intervention must be thoroughly explored in future research and translated into policy analysis. Unrelenting pressure is required if the emerging lessons are to be equally applied to minorities currently denied them by discriminatory assumptions and practices.

Authors Nathan Hughes and Todd Hartman have succeeded in delivering a data analysis which is truly informative and timely, carving out many important future channels for further research. Their recommendations on data recording and policy issues should be heeded by all who care about a better criminal justice system.

With acknowledgement and thanks to the Barrow Cadbury Trust for supporting this comment piece. The views are the author’s own.

Young adults in court: shrinking numbers and increasing disparities

Read the full report