You are here:   Columns >  The Mole > The CPS: A Criminal Waste of Money
 
Prosecutions for all but the most trivial matters now have to be filtered through a Crown Prosecutor, since the police no longer have authority to make charges. Decisions can take weeks or even months in contested cases, with the result that some dangerous people remain free on police bail. Despite a new “Charging Scheme,” delays in charging defendants can give them time to intimidate witnesses, and witnesses time to forget or move away and lose contact with the police.

To prove that this scheme is working, the statistics for discontinuing cases or for cases “failing” have to be seen to improve. Therefore, each CPS area is monitored and monthly statistics prepared for how it is doing. There are no prizes for taking difficult decisions. Moreover, the pre-charge decision is taken when there has been no input from the Defence. It is not until the case arrives at court that the Prosecution may become aware that the defendant is, for example, learning disabled or schizophrenic.

One effective way of dealing with domestic violence used to be to arrest the perpetrator for Breach of the Peace. Often the victim (usually female) would just want him removed for the night so she could have some breathing space and he could calm down after a family row. The defendant would then be produced in court the following morning and bound over to keep the peace. This warned him to be careful in future and imposed a sum of money he would have to pay if he was subsequently prosecuted for similar behaviour, but it did not count as a criminal conviction.

However, because proceedings for breach of the peace are a civil rather than a criminal action, any case ending in a bindover is considered a failed prosecution for the CPS. Prosecutors are therefore told not to use them.

In general, individual prosecutors no longer exercise the discretion they once enjoyed. Today it is line managers who decide if a case should be continued or not. These managers are much more vulnerable to political pressure through, say, a letter from a local MP complaining about why a certain person is not being prosecuted.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
Anonymous
January 23rd, 2011
1:01 PM
As a former national spokesman for the CPS (I left back in the early 90s) Your experience almost 20 years ago makes you qualified to comment about the CPS today? The article is almost totally false. As someone who works in the CPS I know for a fact that self employed barristers do not hold a brief from start to trial - more often than not they farm it out to their colleagues. "case workers have no such code or tradition and are more easily scared into line" Utter nonsense. Caseworkers have the same level of protection as lawyers, if they are asked to do something improper as Civil Servants they can make a complaint even up to the independent Civil Service Commission. "reading information sent by fax" Most information is sent by email and the prosecutors do speak to the officer albeit over the phone. "even recording the “ethnic group” of a defendant on its computer system" The CPS has to follow a number of equality requirements as per Macpherson. They have no choice. "The system was much quicker and more efficient, and involved much less paperwork." Birmingham Six, Guilford Four, Bridgewater Three, Judith Ward, Stefan Kisko etc.

Peter C Glover
July 9th, 2008
6:07 PM
As a former national spokesman for the CPS (I left back in the early 90s) I can only agree with every word this article says. However, I have a real problem with publishing anything (Economist take note) that has the byline 'Anonymous'. I have long argued (as a journalist, writer and blogger) that anything written 'anonymously' is not worth the ink expended on it,as it is without any moral value. As far as the reader is concerned the writer may well have an axe to grind of which we would know nothing. Having said that, I welcome Standpoint - we in the UK are desperately in need of breaking the mould of the PC gatekeepers of the news in the liberal-dominated mainstream. It would be good therefore for you to think beyond articles by the 'usual suspects'. Note how the numerous new US sites like Real Clear Politics, The American Thinker and many others major on the strength of the argument, NOT just the same old contracted journos. That's why I, as a UK freelancer, am forced to write for US news mags and online sites, so tied up is the UK op-ed and feature market.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.