Serving the CPS
Of all my lasting impressions regarding the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), the most vivid took place last September. A 250 page case file which took me three days to complete and was bound for crown court had arrived back on my desk with a note attached to it asking me to photocopy the contents and send it back to the Trials Unit. The rationale for sending a file from one side of Brighton to the other purely for copying escaped me although when I phoned the trials unit to clarify the request they told me there was nobody available in their office to do it. As is so often the case, if something needs doing, send it back to the investigating officer. To be sure, the administrative demands of the CPS on rank and file officers play no small part in keeping them off the streets and station bound, providing yet another reason why the employment of civilian staff in dealing with such demands is so desparately needed.
The CPS was established in 1986 under the direction of the director of public prosecutions, consisting of a merger of his old department with the existing police prosecution departments. The CPS is responsible for public prosecutions of people charged with criminal offences in England and Wales. I spoke with long-serving officers when I was in the job and retired officers since who have all said that years ago magistrates accepted a paper summary of events in addition to a print of the offender’s previous convictions. This practice was interpreted differently from one region to another. Nowadays, upon charging an offender, rank and file officers have to prepare what is known as a ‘fast track file,’ an ‘expedited file,’ or a ‘narey file,’ which follows the defendant to his or her first appearance in the Magistrates’ Court. This file contains the investigation papers created up until the point of charge. It can consist of, on average, forty pieces of paper at the very least and can easily exceed one hundred. If done properly, the file can take two to three hours to complete. The repetition and duplication involved is both time consuming and painful. Invariably, the file has to be completed before an officer finishes his or her shift which by that time can exceed ten hours.
Once at court, if the defendant pleads guilty, the case file papers are retained and archived. If the defendant pleads not guilty, the file is sent back to the officer to upgrade into a full trial file (like the one sent back to me for copying). Depending on how much evidence is to form part of the main section of the upgraded file and also how much unused material (investigation papers which don’t form part of the main file but which still need to be included and listed on typed schedules) there is, this file can consist of hundreds of pieces of paper and take a good few days to complete. Now, the obvious question is, considering that formerly a summary to the magistrates of the incident and previous convictions sufficed, why is it necessary for the CPS to possess the extent of information which, depending on the initial plea of the defendant, will have been completed needlessly? I can only conclude that the CPS, even at that early stage in proceedings, want to be prepared evidentially for every eventuality.
Such preparation has considerable consequences for uniformed officers and makes the difference between the time they spend out on the street and time spent in the station. Likewise with the full file upgrade (every officer’s worst nightmare). Although some forces have prosecution case workers who prepare a proportion of full files, the majority are left to officers to complete. Court files are returned to rank and file officers to upgrade because there is no-one else available to complete them. However, that does not justify leaving time-intensive files for completion by officers along with subsequent memos from the CPS with numerous bullet points asking them to carry out further enquiries and take further statements. That should be for non-police staff to assist with. Uniformed officers have too much to do already responding to the radio, carrying out current investigations, taking statements, getting five detections for the month, arresting, interviewing and charging offenders and also, when the opportunity allows, carrying out some pro-active and preventative policing. Regrettably, by virtue of the burdens placed upon them, modern British police officers are serving the CPS far more and the public far less.
My family and I have had recent experience with the fickleness (is that a word?!) of the CPS. I can’t go into detail as we’re awaiting a court hearing date.
The Officer took statements and compiled the required file for CPS perusal. The CPS sent it back with a request for additional statements. The file was resubmitted. The CPS sent it back with a request for even more statements. The file was resubmitted. The CPS eventually approved it going to Magistrates Court.
On each occasion, the file was reviewed by a different CPS bod, and each time, the Officer was told to obtain different additional information. Every Officer who came into contact with us stated that a crime had been committed, but it would appear that instead of COURTS deciding who was innocent or guilty, the CPS are now screening all cases and only sending those to court where a conviction is a foregone conclusion. Why? Finances, I bet you.
When my dad was in the Force, the Officer wrote a summary of the case, dates to avoid, and backgrounds on those involved. The file was presented to the Sergeant who made the decision whether it went to court or not. If it did, then the Defendent appeared to enter his plea, the court were already in possession of the facts of the case and dates to avoid, so a hearing date was set in short order. None of this; “your hearing date is 6 months from now” malarkey.
As far as I can see, the legal profession have the Police Force by the short and curlies and are running the show, in cahoots with the Government.
So, whose pockets are getting lined by all this, because it certainly isn’t the victims of crime?!!!!
This suggests to the more elderly (50+ ?) or more reactionary among us, that the police ought to shoot far more suspects and prosecute far less… I’m sure this isn’t really the reaction you were really seeking to evince…
However, as an ordinary member of the public, alarmed by the Tony Martin trial a few years back, and worried by my own personal experiences, what does the future hold unless, (and yes it scares me too), households can be armed for self-protection…
It’s not just lack of action (or totally stupid reaction) by the CPS, but lack of detection by the police (which I hasten to add, in my own case, has been totally down to under-resourcing, the officers concerned having been more than helpful)…as I grow older I become more vulnerable…why should it be so difficult for the law to provide adequate deterrents to keep my family protected?
We’ve all gone mad! Offenders rights? Maybe I’m a closet fascist, (though I doubt it after a lifetime spent avoiding the Tory vote!), but I think they forfeit those the moment they offended…Sadly at the moment it pays to break all the rules and be lawless…
Cogidubnus
I agree completely.
A neighbour pleaded Not Guilty to throwing a piece of paving slab through our kitchen window, despite me witnessing the incident. The CPS approved the case going to court, and 6 months later, I dutifully appeared and gave my evidence.
We won the case and the Defendent was forewarned that he was facing 80 to 100 hours of unpaid Community Service and paying us compensation of £123:60 for a replacement double glazed window. Sentencing was adjourned for a month whilst pre sentencing reports were compiled.
The Defendent didn’t bother turning up for sentencing, so the case was adjourned a further month. We were horrified to discover, the Defendent wasn’t issued with a Community Service Order as there was “some already in place”, and as the Defendent’s solicitor had requested all fines etc were deducted from source and the Defendent was maxed out on deductions from his Benefits, we received NO compensation. His punishment? A 30 day tagging order and curfew, comfy in his own property, overlooking our property which he was found guilty of malisciously damaging.
So, the lesson he learned? Do what you like as the courts won’t inconvenience you at all, and the local housing organisation won’t take any action.
My family are still living in fear of further criminal damage (two incidents of actual damage and many attempts so far), verbal abuse, intimidation and harassment. We’re also as victims, the ones paying the price by having to repair the damage this individual has caused.
Everyone screams about the human rights of the perpetrators, but the human rights of the victims appear to have been conveniently dismissed.
Justice for victims of crime? I think not……
I admire your work,can you teach me how to write such a nice article