The time from charge to trial in this case was 3 years and 4 months, and the proceedings were permanently stayed on the grounds that this period of delay constituted an abuse of process. Since that decision, the courts have been flooded with similar cases. These cases have set forth 11 principles on the right to a speedy trial. The courts have an inherent discretionary power to order criminal cases stayed unconditionally. Where there is unjustified or unreasonable delay, there is a presumption in favor of the accused that the delay was prejudicial. The determination of the reasonableness of delay is based on the length of and explanation for the delay, the extent of the accused's assertion of the right to a speedy trial, and the actual prejudice to the accused. The Supreme Court can order proceedings permanently stayed. The extent and nature of the delay must be weighed in terms of the jurisdiction's realities. The totality of unwaived delays must be considered, as must the complexity of the case. Lack of investigatory or prosecutorial resources is not of itself justification for delay. While progress is being made in reducing court delays, real progress will require the establishment of acceptable standards and the provision of resources to ensure that standards are achieved.