The CPS: A Criminal Waste of Money

July 2008

Another dangerous development is the CPS’s increasing use of non-lawyers – designated caseworkers – to present criminal cases. This is because they are cheaper than properly trained lawyers. Fewer than one-third of the 9,000 or so CPS staff are actually lawyers. If a solicitor or employed barrister is asked by their line manager to do something improper, he or she can refuse to continue the case. However, case workers have no such code or tradition and are more easily scared into line. Yet case workers routinely take on remand hearings and sentencing hearings in the magistrates’ courts, indeed almost everything but full trials. There is even talk of them presenting some crown court cases.

People who watch American TV police dramas and then become involved with the English justice system are often surprised to see that in England the police and prosecutors do not work hand in hand during investigations or even after charge. The Charging Scheme may change this culture to some extent. But before the CPS was created in 1985, police officers presented their own cases in the magistrates’ courts in simple matters, though for serious cases they would use their own solicitors who, if a case went to the Crown Court, could instruct private counsel. The system was much quicker and more efficient, and involved much less paperwork.

The CPS has a much vaunted CPS Direct programme to make up for the absence of prosecutors from police stations during the night, when most crimes are committed and most suspects arrested. The problem is that the quality of decision made after reading information sent by fax is not nearly as good as one reached after a conversation with the arresting officers by a solicitor who knows the officers and the area concerned.

Tags:

Political Correctness

Social Affairs

UK Politics

Like this article? Share, save or print using the icons below:

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

More Columns