I agree with you, but you said this and I thought people may be interested in experiences from England about online court appearances. > (Courts, for what it's

I agree with you, but you said this and I thought people may be interested in experiences from England about online court appearances. > (Courts, for what it's worth, continue to function). In England we split courts up, so we have a variety of criminal courts, courts of protection, family courts, etc. Before Covid-19 they were all trying to "go digital", and were having mixed results. Now, because of Covid-19, they've just had to make it work somehow. Here's some discussion from (the excellent) Transparency Project: http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/remote-hearings-a-gulf-between-lawyers-and-lay-parties/ http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/remote-hearings-a-gulf... They link to quite a few different blogs and comments, but I really want to highlight this one. It's from the courts of protection. http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/remote-justice-a-family-perspective/ http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/remote-justice-a-famil... Sarah's father had a stroke. He was taken to hospital. He started to refuse to eat or drink. The doctors decided he did not have mental capacity to make that choice, and so they fitted a nasogastric tube. He told his daughter that this was wrong, and he pulled out (!!!) his tube several times. They gave him a PEG tube, and he was eventually discharged to a nursing home. He wants the medical treatment (feeding) to stop; she wants what he wants; so now they go to the court to get an order. They lost the case. This is, of course, a very distressing case for all involved. But this woman says that the informal nature of a skype case, with people's pets wandering in and out and people talking in a casual way to each other made it worse. There's some sense that because Sarah wasn't in the same room as the judge and the lawyers that they didn't recognise her distress. So, court cases are going ahead, but there's some considerable adjustment needed. Also, they're not always going ahead. Here's a case about a form of child abuse (fabricated or induced illness). It's a really serious case, and the mother risks being separated from her child (or the child risks remaining with an abusive mother). The judge decided that this isn't a case that can be heard remotely. http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/p-a-child-remote-hearing-rev-3-2020-ewfc-32-when-is-remote-justice-not-justice/ http://www.transparencyproject.org.uk/p-a-child-remote-heari...