,
13 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
These figures are undoubtedly shocking. The main driver however, according to the Home Office stats, appears to be the failure by the prosecuting authorities to take *any* decision, rather than deciding *not* to charge.
There are two reasons that might explain this: [THREAD]
There are two reasons that might explain this: [THREAD]
Firstly, due to the well-known failings surrounding disclosure (see the CPS Inspectorate report here justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/cjji/inspectio…), which have derailed several high profile cases, it is now common for the CPS to front-load the disclosure process before charging a suspect.
This means that the material that is often obtained and reviewed during the disclosure process (by which the prosecution is required to disclose to the defence any material reasonably capable of assisting the defence or undermining the prosecution) is now obtained pre-charge.
In cases where it appears that credibility of a complainant is likely to be in issue (because a suspect has disputed what they have said), this may involve the police obtaining records held by other public bodies - such as social services records, school records, medical records.
Just identifying getting hold of the records can take a long time. The state’s wheels turn agonisingly slowly. Then reviewing this material takes time. The police have lost 20,000 staff. A third of CPS lawyers have been cut. They simply cannot cope.
Add to this the explosion of digital evidence. Analysing mobile phones - of suspects and complainants - takes a long time. There are currently backlogs of over a year in some parts of the country. The police just don’t have the resources to do this.
Once the phones are analysed, the review then takes place. And again, lack of officers and lawyers = long delays.
All in all, there are now “built in” delays of up to two years pre-charge. It’s not only sex cases, although these are particularly badly hit. I see it everywhere.
All in all, there are now “built in” delays of up to two years pre-charge. It’s not only sex cases, although these are particularly badly hit. I see it everywhere.
A second reason behind the growth in cases drifting without a charging decision is what is called “release under investigation” (“RUI”).
Since the law on police bail was changed in an effort to force the police to take decisions quicker, police numbers have been cut. So...
Since the law on police bail was changed in an effort to force the police to take decisions quicker, police numbers have been cut. So...
...the police have reacted in an inevitable way. They’ve simply stopped bailing people. Instead, suspects are “released under investigation” without any conditions. Sometimes for years at a time. Meanwhile, nothing is done. There is no impetus: telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/03/1…
This all means that charging decisions are not taken until months, even years, after a complaint is first made. And that, in part at least, explains this graph. We can see that cases not pursued because of evidential difficulties have in fact decreased as a percentage.
This is not to say that there are no problems with the quality of charging decisions or internal CPS policy. Such concerns are why legal action is being taken, as explained in the article. And I understand why.
Anecdotally, in the sex cases I prosecute and defend, I don’t see a flood of meritorious cases being dropped or not charged - but then I wouldn’t. As a barrister, I mostly see the cases that *have* been charged, rather than those not pursued. So I can’t add much of use.
What I would say though is that it would be a mistake to assume that the explanation for low charging rates lies *solely* with the police and CPS abandoning strong cases/not taking complaints seriously.
Highly culpable is the government whose cuts are contributing to the delays
Highly culpable is the government whose cuts are contributing to the delays
