Why won't they charge?

I've mentioned the apparent lack of enthusiasm the police and CPS seem to have for charging people with crimes and as I sit here billing I am seeing yet more examples of it.

I won't go into detail, but one case I have is very simple and clear cut.  Ex-partners meet up to discuss sale of former home.  One of them gets upset and punches the other in the face several times causing minor injuries.  The suspect is obviously known to the complainant so no ID issues. 

Result: no further action.

Comments

  1. Met detective17 May 2012 at 19:50

    The answer is all too simple. The CPS won't charge unless its a dead cert. I don't much care what their official policies are, down at the volume end of the business cps London direct will only authorise were there is utterly and completely overwhelming evidence. Over the years police have been worn down by this and now our gatekeepers ( known as evidential review officers in the met) have the same mindset . So now we bin perfectly good jobs ourselves without even going near the cps . The sort of job like this one where a court should be allowed to decide. Ive got an opinion becausevI've been a London CID officer for years and years and years.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Anonymous17 May 2012 at 21:20

    You give far few details for a reasonable answer as to why this wasn't charged. There could be any number of explanations - one of the common ones being that the complainant refuses to support a prosecution.

    What about the account of the suspect in interview - presumably it was denied? Their version may have been just as plausible as that of the complainant and so it is nothing more sinister than there not being a realistic prospect of conviction because there was no way to choose between the two.

    Or perhaps they claimed self defence - potentially rendering visible injuries (if any) far less relevant.

    With respect, it is very easy to provide few details and then make imply criticisms based on those limited facts. The reality is that these things are rarely as simplistic as Met detective above suggests and you, as a defence lawyer, may well never see the information that was crucial in the decision not to charge.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Defence Brief18 May 2012 at 13:02

    Anon2, without meaning to be rude, but I wonder if I could invite you to consider for a moment why I might be light on the details? I cannot disclose confidential client information and so I provide a brief outline that sets out the situation in a nutshell.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous18 May 2012 at 18:07

    I do of course understand that you can only provide brief details about any case. However, here you have asked the question "why won't they charge?", thereby implying that they should have done, but don't provide enough information to allow anyone to challenge that implication.

    So, also without wishing to be rude, if you are not in a position to provide any further information then it might be better not to ask the question in the first place. It's not really fair to take a swipe at the police and CPS and then say that you can't discuss the matter any more because of confidentiality.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Woman on a Raft23 May 2012 at 23:38

    How about a private criminal prosecution? Obviously you'd end up doing the work for no fee. The CPS would take it over and probably discontinue it but it might make a point.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anonymous4 June 2012 at 13:34

    Offence denied by suspect. No medical evidence or other evidence of injuries. No witnesses.
    Essentially one word against another.

    Does this pass the CPS full code test of realistic prospect of conviction?
    I don't thinks so, particularly if the account or previous of the victim can be held against them.

    Me - I'd charge, but that's why I'm a cop and not a lawyer ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Defence Brief7 June 2012 at 18:03

    It appears I have to point out what I had mistakenly thought to be obvious... the title of this blog post is rhetorical. It does not literally call for an answer to the question. I was rather hoping, along with similar posts on this topic, to raise awareness of the continual lack of charging that seems to pervade the prosecution ranks of the criminal justice system at the moment. If I did not make that clear then I am sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous5 December 2012 at 05:51

    When very effort that is made to save your married life fails, a marriage therapist is the best person who can sort out the differences and bring
    life back to the crumbling relationship. It is not uncommon for massage therapists to
    consult with physiotherapists before and during a massage.

    The school or university should have what is called the Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE).
    My webpage ; sertraline treatment of major depression

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Are items referred to in s.9’s as exhibits bound to be served?

  Background - CPS served a witness statement on me that exhibited two BWV clips that are potentially relevant to the Crown’s case and may have some relevance to the defence case insofar as they are likely to show the lighting and weather at the time events happened. Somebody has listed the clips as unused material rather than putting them in the exhibits folder that accompanies the served evidence. This raised an interesting (to me anyway) question about whether a party who exhibits an item in a statement is bound to serve it on their opponent. At court the judge took the view that the Crown were at liberty to classify items exhibited in s9s as unused material if they chose not to rely upon them in evidence. I took the view that if they are exhibited then they must be served along with the witness statement that exhibits the item and that the solution to a situation where the Crown say they are now unused is to edit the witness statement to remove the reference, by agreement with ...
More gibberish >>

Is there twice as much violent crime in the UK versus the USA?

Image
The tweet from Charlie Kirk I came across a screenshot of a Twitter post while on Facebook this morning. The original post now has 11,000 retweets and 23,000 likes on Twitter. As you can see from the picture somebody called Charlie Kirk, who is a right-wing American commentator, claims that there are 933 violent crimes in the UK per 100,000 people. This is more than double the rate he claims for the USA where he says there are only 399 violent crimes per 100,000 people. The UK doesn’t feel that violent to me, so is it true? We’re all gonna die According to the FBI, in 2016 there were 1,248,185 violent crimes committed across the whole of the USA. That is an increase of 4.1% on the 2015 figure but still represented only 386.3 violent crimes per 100,000 people . So, Mr Kirk appears to be slightly overestimating the violent crime in the USA. I should say that I am using the 2016 figures as those are the latest available on the FBI website, so maybe he has slightly differe...
More gibberish >>

Driving without insurance

Image
Insurance is a contract that remains in force until it expires or is cancelled As you may, or may not, know I specialise in motoring law and most of my work involves defending people accused of drink driving . With the drink driving often come other road traffic offences such as driving while disqualified and driving without insurance. It’s driving without insurance I want to talk about today because I think far too many police officers, solicitors, barristers and judges miss a key legal point when looking at these cases. I’ve received prosecution papers today for somebody accused of driving while disqualified and driving without insurance. The no insurance element is claim that the suspect did not tell the insurer about the disqualification. In his statement, the police officers says, “ [I] contacted [the insurer] who called me back informing me they would not consider the insurance policy valid as there were no convictions disclosed.” Looks like an open an...
More gibberish >>