a.) explain the requirements of the CPS for prosecuting suspects (AC2.1)
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was established by the Prosecution of Offences Act
1985, in 1986. Before the CPS, the police were the personnel in charge of prosecuting,
however it was felt that a more independent organisation should make these decisions so
that the police don't influence the decision to prosecute. The roles of the CPS include
advising the police in early stages of an investigation, deciding which cases to prosecute
(this charging role was given in the Criminal Justice Act 2003), determining the appropriate
charge, preparing cases for court and presenting cases in court. There is also a 24 hour
advice service for the police through CPS direct. However, the CPS is not always correct in
their convictions, for example in the case of Abu Hamza. In 2004, Hamza was arrested by
the British police because the US requested he be extradited to face charges. The CPS then
declined in 2014 as they found there was insufficient evidence to prosecute, however he was
later charged by British authorities with 16 offences for initiation violence plus racial hatred
and was sentenced to 7 years in prison. He was also found guilty of 11 terrorism charges by
a jury in Manhattan after being extradited from the UK to the US in 2012. Conscripts that
were sent to the CPS were ignored even though they contained admissible evidence to the
alleged offences and so it took 7 years before his arrest because the CPS incorrectly
deemed his evidence to be insufficient. So, in order to help produce fairness and
consistency when prosecuting, the CPS uses a two-stage test called the full code test, with
the two stages being called the evidential test and the public interest test. The evidential test
occurs before prosecution and focuses on whether there is sufficient evidence to convict the
suspect. The first step is the evidential test which asks if there is enough evidence to gain a
‘realistic prospect of conviction’. The CPS has to acknowledge what the defence case may
be, in order to take into account how that is likely to affect the prosecution. A realistic
prospect of conviction is an objective test. It means that a jury or a bench of magistrates,
properly directed in accordance with the law, will be more likely than not to convict the
defendant of the charge alleged. During the evidential test, there are three main questions
that are focused on, is the evidence reliable, is it allowed in court and is the evidence
credible. If the evidence given is inadmissible in court, it simply cannot be used in order to
convict a suspect. If the evidence is reliable, it means it can be trusted i.e the evidence is
coming from a reliable source such as investigative officials or could be DNA or hair and
fibre taken directly from the crime scene. If the evidence is credible, it can be believed
however this does not necessarily it can be trusted. Credibility can be checked by comparing
to other pieces of evidence and checking for any inconsistencies.
If the evidential test guidelines have been met, the CPS then moves onto the next stage, the
Public Interest test. The CPS have to consider whether or not it is within the public interest to
prosecute as it may be that the public interest is better served with an out of court disposal.
Another set of questions are placed to decide this, however this list is not exhaustive and
some questions may not apply, depending on the case. The questions are as follows, how
serious is the offence committed? For example, a parking fine isn't considered a serious
offence so it won't be in the public interest to prosecute, meaning it wouldn't pass the public
interest test. Another example is murder vs manslaughter, as it is more likely to be within the
public interest to take a murder case to court than manslaughter, as it's seen as a more
serious offence due to intentions. What is the level of culpability of the suspect? The greater
the level, the more likely a prosecution will be, for example an offender who evidently
planned every step of their crime is more ‘blameable’ than an offender perhaps with mental
, health issues that cause the actions they've made. What are the circumstances of and the
harm caused to the victim? This could be in the form of the victim losing their job or in more
extreme cases injury or death. The higher this level of harm, the more that a prosecution is
required in the public interest. Furthermore, if the victim was vulnerable and the perpetrator
held a position of trust over them a prosecution is also more likely as this can be seen as
discrimination. Was the suspect under the age of 18 at the time of the offence? The welfare
of a child must be considered, and often if the victim is a child it is more within the public
interest to prosecute. What is the impact on the community? The more of an impact there is,
a prosecution is more likely. And finally, is prosecution a proportionate response? For
example, if there is a case involving multiple suspects then prosecution may be reserved for
the main participants of the crime in order to avoid complex proceedings.
If an immediate charging decision is necessary and the full code test cannot be used, then
the threshold test is used. This can only be applied where the suspect holds a substantial
bail risk and not all of the evidence is yet available by the time the suspect is meant to be
released from custody. So, the suspect is temporarily charged until the full code test is able
to be applied. There are two questions to be answered in the threshold test, is there
reasonable suspicion that the person to be charged has committed the offence? And are
there reasonable grounds for believing that the continuing investigation will provide further
evidence, within a reasonable amount of time. But, there have been many cases where the
use of the threshold test has been questioned. This can be seen in the case of Damilola
Taylor where it should have been clear that the evidence from the main suspect should've
been inadmissible due to inconsistencies within the evidence.
b.) briefly describe each stage of the trial process (AC2.2)
The personnel involved in the trial process are the prosecution, the defence and the
magistrates. The prosecution are representatives of the Crown Prosecution Service. Their
role is to present the facts of the case to the court in a fair way. The lawyer may either be
employed by the CPS or acting as their agent for the court case. The defence’s role is to
cast doubt on the prosecution's evidence. They do not have to prove innocence. In a
magistrates’ court the role of the magistrate is to decide liability, whether the case is proved
by the CPS, and pass the appropriate sentence.
The first stage of trial processes is pre-trial. The pre-trial stage determines what court the
trial will be held in, details of the case and then will prepare for court. For instance, there are
three types of criminal offences. The first type is summary offences, which are the least
serious offences including minor offences such as assault, battery and most motoring
offences. These must stay in the magistrates court. Then, there's triable either way offences.
These offences can be tried either in magistrates or crown court, for example burglary, theft
and assault. The third type is indictable offences, which are the most serious. They start in
Magistrates court but must be tried in Crown court, for example, murder, rape and
manslaughter. This part of the process helps to bridge the gap between arrest and trial, also
outlining the structure that the case will follow. The length and scope of this procedure vary
depending on several factors, including the complexity of the case, and the procedures in
different courts. Pre-trial is key in ensuring that the trial abides by the rule of law, deciding
the court of justice.
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) was established by the Prosecution of Offences Act
1985, in 1986. Before the CPS, the police were the personnel in charge of prosecuting,
however it was felt that a more independent organisation should make these decisions so
that the police don't influence the decision to prosecute. The roles of the CPS include
advising the police in early stages of an investigation, deciding which cases to prosecute
(this charging role was given in the Criminal Justice Act 2003), determining the appropriate
charge, preparing cases for court and presenting cases in court. There is also a 24 hour
advice service for the police through CPS direct. However, the CPS is not always correct in
their convictions, for example in the case of Abu Hamza. In 2004, Hamza was arrested by
the British police because the US requested he be extradited to face charges. The CPS then
declined in 2014 as they found there was insufficient evidence to prosecute, however he was
later charged by British authorities with 16 offences for initiation violence plus racial hatred
and was sentenced to 7 years in prison. He was also found guilty of 11 terrorism charges by
a jury in Manhattan after being extradited from the UK to the US in 2012. Conscripts that
were sent to the CPS were ignored even though they contained admissible evidence to the
alleged offences and so it took 7 years before his arrest because the CPS incorrectly
deemed his evidence to be insufficient. So, in order to help produce fairness and
consistency when prosecuting, the CPS uses a two-stage test called the full code test, with
the two stages being called the evidential test and the public interest test. The evidential test
occurs before prosecution and focuses on whether there is sufficient evidence to convict the
suspect. The first step is the evidential test which asks if there is enough evidence to gain a
‘realistic prospect of conviction’. The CPS has to acknowledge what the defence case may
be, in order to take into account how that is likely to affect the prosecution. A realistic
prospect of conviction is an objective test. It means that a jury or a bench of magistrates,
properly directed in accordance with the law, will be more likely than not to convict the
defendant of the charge alleged. During the evidential test, there are three main questions
that are focused on, is the evidence reliable, is it allowed in court and is the evidence
credible. If the evidence given is inadmissible in court, it simply cannot be used in order to
convict a suspect. If the evidence is reliable, it means it can be trusted i.e the evidence is
coming from a reliable source such as investigative officials or could be DNA or hair and
fibre taken directly from the crime scene. If the evidence is credible, it can be believed
however this does not necessarily it can be trusted. Credibility can be checked by comparing
to other pieces of evidence and checking for any inconsistencies.
If the evidential test guidelines have been met, the CPS then moves onto the next stage, the
Public Interest test. The CPS have to consider whether or not it is within the public interest to
prosecute as it may be that the public interest is better served with an out of court disposal.
Another set of questions are placed to decide this, however this list is not exhaustive and
some questions may not apply, depending on the case. The questions are as follows, how
serious is the offence committed? For example, a parking fine isn't considered a serious
offence so it won't be in the public interest to prosecute, meaning it wouldn't pass the public
interest test. Another example is murder vs manslaughter, as it is more likely to be within the
public interest to take a murder case to court than manslaughter, as it's seen as a more
serious offence due to intentions. What is the level of culpability of the suspect? The greater
the level, the more likely a prosecution will be, for example an offender who evidently
planned every step of their crime is more ‘blameable’ than an offender perhaps with mental
, health issues that cause the actions they've made. What are the circumstances of and the
harm caused to the victim? This could be in the form of the victim losing their job or in more
extreme cases injury or death. The higher this level of harm, the more that a prosecution is
required in the public interest. Furthermore, if the victim was vulnerable and the perpetrator
held a position of trust over them a prosecution is also more likely as this can be seen as
discrimination. Was the suspect under the age of 18 at the time of the offence? The welfare
of a child must be considered, and often if the victim is a child it is more within the public
interest to prosecute. What is the impact on the community? The more of an impact there is,
a prosecution is more likely. And finally, is prosecution a proportionate response? For
example, if there is a case involving multiple suspects then prosecution may be reserved for
the main participants of the crime in order to avoid complex proceedings.
If an immediate charging decision is necessary and the full code test cannot be used, then
the threshold test is used. This can only be applied where the suspect holds a substantial
bail risk and not all of the evidence is yet available by the time the suspect is meant to be
released from custody. So, the suspect is temporarily charged until the full code test is able
to be applied. There are two questions to be answered in the threshold test, is there
reasonable suspicion that the person to be charged has committed the offence? And are
there reasonable grounds for believing that the continuing investigation will provide further
evidence, within a reasonable amount of time. But, there have been many cases where the
use of the threshold test has been questioned. This can be seen in the case of Damilola
Taylor where it should have been clear that the evidence from the main suspect should've
been inadmissible due to inconsistencies within the evidence.
b.) briefly describe each stage of the trial process (AC2.2)
The personnel involved in the trial process are the prosecution, the defence and the
magistrates. The prosecution are representatives of the Crown Prosecution Service. Their
role is to present the facts of the case to the court in a fair way. The lawyer may either be
employed by the CPS or acting as their agent for the court case. The defence’s role is to
cast doubt on the prosecution's evidence. They do not have to prove innocence. In a
magistrates’ court the role of the magistrate is to decide liability, whether the case is proved
by the CPS, and pass the appropriate sentence.
The first stage of trial processes is pre-trial. The pre-trial stage determines what court the
trial will be held in, details of the case and then will prepare for court. For instance, there are
three types of criminal offences. The first type is summary offences, which are the least
serious offences including minor offences such as assault, battery and most motoring
offences. These must stay in the magistrates court. Then, there's triable either way offences.
These offences can be tried either in magistrates or crown court, for example burglary, theft
and assault. The third type is indictable offences, which are the most serious. They start in
Magistrates court but must be tried in Crown court, for example, murder, rape and
manslaughter. This part of the process helps to bridge the gap between arrest and trial, also
outlining the structure that the case will follow. The length and scope of this procedure vary
depending on several factors, including the complexity of the case, and the procedures in
different courts. Pre-trial is key in ensuring that the trial abides by the rule of law, deciding
the court of justice.
