To what extent has the establishment of a separate Crown Prosecution Service been successful, and why?

Daria, Katie, Rebecca

The CPS has been successful in some areas but not all

This is the argument we are putting forward throughout this presentation

Contents

•Definitions•Context•Facts and Figures•Theory•Independency•Interdependency•CPS & Convictions•Conclusion•Bibliography

Definitions and Acronyms • Crown Prosecution Service (CPS)• Success• Models

▫ Justice▫Punishment▫Management of crime and criminals (Packer; 1968, King;

1981: 13 in Davies, Croall and Tyler; 2005:26)

• Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)• Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service

Inspectorate (HMCPSI)• Royal Commission of Criminal Procedure (RCCP)

Context

•Thatcherite thinking

•Pre-1985

•1980s – the turning point (CPS: 2012)

•Glidewell Report 1998 (Adams: 1998)

•Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate Act 2000 (HMCPSI: 2012)

Facts and Figures

•Annual expenditure £568 million•Employs 7,800+•Prosecuted 1.25 million for criminal

offences (2004-05)▫92% Magistrates’ Court (National Audit Office; 2006)

Convictions Unsuccessful Prosecutions 0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Comparison of Convictions and Unsuccessful Prosecutions for a Number of Offences

Homicide

Offences Against the Persons

Public Order

Sexual Offences

Drug Offences

Motoring

Perc

enta

ge (

%)

(Data.gov.uk; 2012)

63%16%

8%

4%

3%3%

2% 2%2%

Criminal Justice System expenditure 1999/2000

PolicePrision ServiceCriminal Legal AidProbation ServiceCrown Prosecution Service and Serious Fraud OfficeMagistrates' Courts OtherCriminal Injuries Compensation and Victim SupportCrown Court

(Home Office; 1999:70)

Theory

Right Realism

Classism and Neo-

Conservativism

Neo-Liberalis

m

Success as IndependenceHas the CPS maintained its independence from the police?

Job Well Done?

•Sufficient evidence

•Public interest

•Can they succeed at these independent of the police?

CPS as a bridge•‘...bridge between police investigation

and criminal courts...’ (McConville & Wilson; 2002:9)

•Dropped 10-20% cases presented by police▫39% due to lack of sufficient evidence▫35% witness unreliability (Home Office: 1994)

•Does that mean it is successful in fulfilling its purpose?

Powerful and uninfluenced?

•Bias in the CJS is ‘imported through police “clues”’ (Duff; 1997:37)

•Independence as sovereign ‘dependent on police raw material... the more refined, greater police influence’ (Mansfield; 1987 in Saunders;

1988:520)

•Has the bridge been tampered with?

Ian Tomlinson case

Why not? Police bedfellows...

Inspecting the inspectors

•HMCPSI ‘more proactive in seeking information and trying to build a case’ (Brown et al; 2007:356)

•Inspectorate found discontinuance because:▫24% on public interest grounds▫25% of cases had delays in decision over

discontinuance (Ashworth and Redmayne, 2010: 213)

Neo-liberal Agendas•Anglo-Capitalism and free markets

•Home Office bureaucratic priorities▫CPS no exception

•No longer about initial goals but... £££▫Its all about the money, money, money...

•‘Efficiency, minimal expense...’ (Croall et al;

2005:12)

Interdependency of the CPSCo-operation with other agencies without losing independence?

Police

Office of the Prosecutor General of the Russian

Federation

Association of Chief Police

Officers

Media

Counter Terrorism

Unit Crimes Against Humanity Unit

Institute of Legal

ExecutivesMet Polic

e

Forensic Science Service

Non-Governmental Organisations

Independent Police

Complaints Commission

Victims

Local Governmen

t

BarNHS

Office of Rail

Regulation

Interpreters

Local Governme

nt Association

Fire and Rescue

Services

Welsh Local Governmen

t Association

Maritime and Coastguard Agency

Child Protection Services

Health and Safety Executive

British Transport

PoliceSerious and

Organised Crime Agency

Immigration Services

CPS as Judge and Jury

•Code for Crown Prosecutors▫‘realistic prospect of conviction’ which

should be an ‘objective test’▫5 editions from start

•Approaches of the CPS▫Predictive▫Intrinsic merits

•1986 and 1992 – favour of diversion from prosecution

•1994 and 2000 – reversal

CPS Currently and its future

•John Report 2003•Determine all but minor routine offences

▫Police regaining powers – independent?•Future to create a super prosecuting

service▫Serious Organised Crime Agency▫Revenue and Customs▫UK Border Agency

CPS and ConvictionsHow does this reflect success, if at all?

Convictions and the CPS •Police organisation of prosecutors before CPS

▫Police reluctant to change this •Disjunctions between Policy and what actually

happens▫ECHR- “equality of arms”

•Evidence and its impact on cases•Prosecution of Offenders Act, 1985, Section

23▫Police control evidence▫Construction by Police, selective, Police

summaries and their eradication

Convictions and the CPS

•Prosecution of cases as crime control strategy ▫“Confait Affair”

•Convictions ▫Discontinuation of weak cases,

Government, statistics ▫Doesn’t it show CPS does what it was set

up to do? Figures suggest it. •Stephen Lawrence case (Macpherson of Cluny, Sir W.,

1999)

Convictions and the CPS

•CPS rarely drops evidentially weak cases, research confirms weak cases continue to be prosecuted, public interest cases

•Violations of due process, Police cautioning

•CPS as decision reverser, not a decision maker, “Prosecution momentum”

Convictions and the CPS

•Prosecution of weak cases ▫Commitment to help the “vulnerable”

victim (Sanders et al. in Home Office, no. 44; 1997)

•Little difference in Police and CPS outlook and evaluations of cases, CPS mindset as PROSECUTION not CRIMINAL JUSTICE agency (McVonville et al.;1991)

•Unlike Holland (Brants and Filed; 1995).

Convictions and the CPS

•Ethnic minority defendants

▫More likely to have cases BOTH discontinued and admitted to court, racism elements of Police (Mhlanga, 1999)

Convictions and the CPS

•Adaptation and progression ▫Schemes like PICA (Public Interest Case

Assessment)▫RCCP recommendation that PICA “should

be expanded across country” (RCCP Report, 1993) ▫“Prosecutors have no way of knowing...” so

Code of Crown Prosecutors can not be applied correctly

Convictions and the CPS

•Adaptation and progression cont. ▫Auld Report 2001▫Statutory Charging Scheme▫Senior Prosecutor in the past warned CPS

needs a cultural change (Brownlee, 2001), structural and role conflicts

•CPS Annual Report 2004-05 proclaimed this as progressed.

The jury is out...

On the grounds of:

IndependenceInterdependence

CPS and Convictions

The verdict is in...

GuiltyOverall, unsuccessful

Not-GuiltyOverall, successful

Bibliography1. Adams, D., 1998. Reforming the Crown Prosecution

Service. Policy Studies, 19(3/4), pp. 223-227.2. Anon., 1981. Royal Commission on Criminal

Prosecution Report. London, HMSO.3. Anon., 1993. Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure,

London: MHSO.4. Anon., HSP 90. Inquiry into the Circumstances Leading

to the Trial of Three Persons on Charges Arising out of the Death of Maxwell Confair and Fair at 27 Doggett Road, London SE6, London: HMSO.

5. Ashworth, A. & Redmayne, M., 2010. Prosecutions. In: The Criminal Process. 4 ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 193-227.

Bibliography6. Auld, L. J., 2001. Review of the Criminal Courts of England

and Wales, London: TSO.7. Barclay, G. C. & Tavares, C., 1999. Information on the

Criminal Justice System in England and Wales Digest 4, London: Home Office.

8. Bowling, B., 1998. Violent Racism. Oxford: Clarendon.9. Brants, C. & Field, S., 1995. Discretion and Accountability in

Prosecution. In: C. Harding et al., ed. Criminal Justice in Europe: A Comparative Study. Oxford: Clarendon.

10. Brown et al., 2007. Protective Roles in Seeking Information and Trying to Build a Case. Journal of Psychology, Crime and Law, 13(4), pp. 355-370.

11. Clarkson et al., 1994. Assaults: The Relationship between Serious ness, Criminalisation and Punishment. Criminal Law Review 4.

Bibliography

12. Crisp, D., 1993. Standardising Prosecutions. In: Home Office Research Bulletin 13.. London: Home Office.

13. Crisp, D., 1993. Standing Accused, London: Home Office.14. Crisp, D. & Moxon, D., 1994. Case Screening by the

Crown Prosecution Service: How and Why Cases are Terminated, London: Her Majesty's Stationary Office.

15. Croall et al., 2005. Criminal Justice. London: Pearson.16. Crown Prosection Service, 2012. Prosecutors. [Online]

Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/prosecutors[Accessed 10 October 2012].

17. Crown Prosecution Service, 2004-05. CPS Annual Report, London: SO.

Bibliography18. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. Area Business Managers. [Online]

Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/abm[Accessed 10 October 2012].

19. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. Chief Crown Prosecutors. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/ccp[Accessed 10 October 2012].

20. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. Chief Executive. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/ce[Accessed 10 October 2012].

21. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. Director of Public Prosecution. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/dpp[Accessed 10 October 2012].

22. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. Headquarters. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/you_cps/our_organisation/headquarters[Accessed 10 October 2012].

23. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. History. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/history[Accessed 10 October 2012].

Bibliography24. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. National Protocols and Agreements

with Other Agencies. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/agencies/index[Accessed 10 October 2012].

25. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. People at the CPS. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/people[Accessed 10 October 2012].

26. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. Sector Directors. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/sectordirectors[Accessed 10 October 2012].

27. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. The Criminal Justice System. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about/cjs[Accessed 8 October 2012].

28. Crown Prosecution Service, 2012. Your CPS: Introduction. [Online] Available at: http://www.cps.gov.uk/about[Accessed 10 October 2012].

29. Duff, P., 1997. Who Controls the Gates. British Journal of Criminology, 37(1).

Bibliography30. Farrall, S. & Hay, C., 2010. Not So Tough On Crime? Why Weren't the

Thatcher Governments More Radical in Reforming the Criminal Justice System?. British Journal of Criminology, 50(3), pp. 550-569.

31. Her Majesty’s Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate, 2012. Who we are and what we do. [Online] Available at: http://www.hmcpsi.gov.uk/about/who-we-are-and-what-we-do[Accessed 14 October 2012].

32. Her Majesty's Government, 2012. Crown Prosecution Service case outcomes by principal offence category - August 2011. [Online] Available at: http://data.gov.uk/dataset/crown-prosecution-service-case-outcomes-by-principal-offence-category-august-2011[Accessed 17 October 2012].

33. Khan, A. N., 1986. Crown Prosecution Service. Journal Of Criminal Law, 50(1), pp. 297-304.

34. Macpherson of Cluny, S. W., 1990. The Stephen Lawrence Case, Cm 4262-1, London: SO.

35. McConville et al., 1991. The Case for Prosecution. London: Routledge.

Bibliography36. McConville et al., 1994. Standing Accused: The Organisation

and Practises of Criminal Defence Lawyers in Britain. Oxford: Clorendon Press.

37. McConville, M. & Wilson, 2002. Handbook of Criminal Justice Process. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

38. Mears, M., 2000. Handle with Extra Care, London: The Spectator.

39. Mhlanga, B., 1999. Race and the CPS. London: SO.40. Mhlanga, B., 2000. Race and the CPS. London: TSO.41. National Audit Office, 2006. Crown Prosecution Service:

Effictive use of Magistrates' Court Hearings. [Online] Available at: http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0506/crown_prosecution_service_eff.aspx[Accessed 11 October 2012].

Bibliography42. Samuels, A., 1986. Crown Prosecution Service. Journal of

Criminal Law, 50(1), pp. 432-441.43. Sanders, Creaton, Bid et al., 1997. Victims with Learning

Disabilities, Oxford: Centre for Criminological Research.44. Sanders, A. & Young, R., 20007. Criminal Justice. 3rd ed.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.45. Saunders, A., 1988. The Limits to Diversion from Prosecution.

British Journal of Criminology, 28(4), pp. 513-532.46. The GHASTLY Truth about the Crown Prosecution Service....

2008. [Film] Directed by 21stCenturyPolitix. UK: YouTube.com.

47. Video of police assault on Ian Tomlinson, who died at the London G20 Protest. 2009. [Film] Directed by The Guardian. UK: YouTube.com.