In the preceding chapter, we have described the conformity of victims, witnesses and defendants at court as ‘reluctant’. Clearly, most have no desire to come to court: defendants are there because they have no choice in the matter, and there is also a degree of compulsion for witnesses, who can potentially be summonsed if they refuse to attend. We would contend, however, that court users’ conformity within the court process is at least partially voluntary rather than being entirely coerced: we are, in other words, distinguishing ‘voluntary acceptance from simple compliance (“I did what I was told to do.”)’ (Tyler, 2009, p 320).

On the basis of how court users described their experiences of court to us, and our own observations of behaviour in court, we are of the view that court users’ conformity is, in part, based on a belief in the legitimacy of the court process: that is, they obey the rules because they perceive an obligation to do so (Hough et al, 2010; 2013b). Our findings echo those of Fielding that, ‘Whether attentive and distressed, or disdainful and ostentatiously at ease, one thing lay participants rarely do is reject the legitimacy of the proceedings’ (2006, p 53) – albeit the sense of legitimacy is implicit rather than explicitly articulated. Similarly, Bottoms and McClean noted that defendants do not ‘struggle’ against the authorities in court (1976, p 227); and Ball has observed:

This final substantive chapter of the book will explore the various dimensions to the perceived legitimacy of the court process. We have discussed at length, above, the many and profound incongruities – and the degree of chaos – that often characterise court proceedings, and we have made it clear that attending court can be terrifying, humiliating, upsetting and frustrating. Why is it that, despite all this, court users largely accept the legitimacy of what goes on in court? This is a compelling question, with significant implications for how the public perceive and experience the criminal justice system more widely.