Thousands of criminals could be allowed to hide in their cells rather than face their victims in court, under bombshell new plans.

Sir Brian Leveson, in a scathing assessment of the crumbling criminal justice system, suggested ramping up the number of video hearings to slash delays.

Convicted offenders should only physically attend sentencing hearings if victims want to give an impact statement, Sir Brian said.

And the former President of the King's Bench Division said "professional witnesses", such as police officers, should be able to give evidence by video-link.

While trials would still be held in person, the vast majority of preliminary hearings in the crown court and the first hearings in magistrates' courts should also be remote, Sir Brian said.

But the proposals have faced a backlash, with the Law Society warning it may "compromise the fairness and safety of the justice system".

Richard Atkinson, of the Law Society, said: "We disagree with some recommendations that may compromise the fairness and safety of the justice system, including providing legal advice by video link to people detained in police stations, and remote first court hearings after arrest where people's liberty is at stake.

"We are concerned about proposals which may distance defendants from the court and their solicitor.

"There have been several pilots of video remand courts, and they have thrown up many difficulties and challenges, which mean we don't have confidence they will enhance justice."

Sir Brian denied it would amount to an easy ride for criminals.

He said: "The way we approach sentencing hearings today is very different and has developed very differently.

"Now, you get a detailed explanation, which is available and I would have that transcribed and now there are transcription mechanisms, which doesn't mean it has to cost the state a fortune to transcribe it, so that everybody can see why the sentence has been imposed and the aggravating and mitigating factors.

"That, I think, underlines the gravity of the case, and it doesn't need the defendant to be there.

"How you deal with defendants who refuse to turn up is a really challenging problem, because if somebody's going to get life for murder, adding an extra 12 months isn't really going to make much of a difference.

"But I don't think that the fact that a defendant is on a screen rather than in court... makes a difference to the majesty or the solemnity of the procedure that's taking place."

Facing claims that many criminals face considerable anxiety when they attend a sentencing hearing, Sir Brian said: "Do you think that creates more anxiety rather than knowing you've got nine years? I'm merely asking the question.

"I think the anxiety comes earlier, and what we need is those who have committed crimes to be convicted.

"We need that to happen at an appropriate pace."

He added: "A police officer can be sitting in a police station, appropriately protected, to give evidence for the ten to 15 minutes that they end up giving evidence for, and actually could be doing some useful work outside that time - preparing the next case, the next file, or, otherwise engaged, rather than hanging around outside a court, waiting for it to be told, actually, the evidence has been agreed you are no longer required."

Sir Brian, in the second part of his inquiry into the crumbling justice system, insisted the police, Crown Prosecution Service, prison staff and court teams must improve their coordination to slash delays.

Every team should dramatically increase its use of AI, he said.

Among his recommendations is a suggestion that courts could rely on AI summaries of witness statements when they are taking case management decisions.

But the former judge insisted jury trials must still be slashed to reduce the backlog.

He wrote: "Whilst crucial to the overall recovery of the system, efficiency changes alone are not enough in the scale of the current crisis, and so policy reforms along with additional capacity are essential."

And prison vans should be given permission to bypass traffic in bus lanes in a bid to get to court on time.

But Sir Brian faced fresh fury over the plans to slash the number of jury trials in half.

Some sexual assault, burglary, drug dealing and robbery cases will be heard by a single judge.

The Ministry of Justice will scrap the right of defendants to "elect" a jury trial for so-called "either way offences".

Judges will assess a case, and if it is "likely" to result in a three-year prison sentence or less, it will be heard by either a magistrate or the new Crown Court Bench Division.

Criminal Bar Association chairman Riel Karmy-Jones KC and CBA vice-chairman Andrew Thomas KC said: "Juries have not caused backlogs or delays. In his report, Sir Brian agrees with this: 'Juries are not to blame for the open caseload. I have never suggested to the contrary.'

"Juries produce demonstrably fair results for victims and the accused, regardless of gender, race or socio-economic background.

"The proposed replacements - either trial by Judge alone or trial by Judge and two selected Magistrates - are both unworkable, unfair and will not carry the confidence of the British public.

"Government must be brave and take the lessons on board from those courts and provide funding nationwide so that other courts can follow suit. But - leave juries to do what they do so well, so that victims and the accused can obtain the justice they deserve."