Is the CPS a Police Puppet ?
The Code for Crown Prosecutors
The Crown Prosecution Service is the principal public prosecuting authority for England and Wales and is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions. The Attorney General is accountable to Parliament for the Service.
The Crown Prosecution Service is a national organisation consisting of 42 Areas. Each Area is headed by a Chief Crown Prosecutor and corresponds to a single police force area, with one for London. It was set up in 1986 to prosecute cases investigated by the police.
Although the Crown Prosecution Service works closely with the police, it is independent of them. The independence of Crown Prosecutors is of fundamental constitutional importance. Casework decisions taken with fairness, impartiality and integrity help deliver justice for victims, witnesses, defendants and the public.
Before the CPS was formed in 1986, it was the police who decided whether to take cases to court.
Today, the CPS decides whether or not to prosecute people in court. However, the police still investigate the alleged offence.
In most cases, Crown Prosecutors will decide whether to charge a person with a criminal offence, and will determine the appropriate charge or charges. In those cases where the police determine the charge, which are usually more minor and routine cases, they apply the same principles.
We will decide whether or not to prosecute by applying the Code for Crown Prosecutors to the facts of the particular case.
The Code for Crown Prosecutors
The Code for Crown Prosecutors (the Code) is a public document that sets out the basic principles Crown Prosecutors should follow when they make decisions on cases. You can get a copy from your local CPS office.
While each case is unique and must be considered on its own facts and merits, there are certain general principles that Crown Prosecutors must follow when they approach each case. They must be fair, independent and objective. They must not let any personal views about a suspect's, victim's or witness's ethnic or national origin, disability, religious beliefs, political views, sexual orientation or whether they are male or female influence their decisions.
It is their duty to make sure that the right person is prosecuted for the right offence. In doing so, Crown Prosecutors must always act in the interests of justice and not only for the purpose of obtaining a conviction. Please read below for some insight into the controls the Police and Councils exert on the system.
IRENA RAY-CROSBY GRANTS COP IMMUNITY - Feb 2 2006
This morning in the Eastbourne Magistrates Court, Deputy District Judge Irena Ray-Crosby refused to issue a Summons naming Superintendent Coll as a witness to be called in the famous Parking Ticket scandal now developing.
"Don't try this at home children"
The case is set to be heard in May 2006, but apparently will be allowed to proceed by the court, without the defendant being allowed the opportunity to question the Police adminstration who may be to blame for the mix up. It seems the defendant in this matter will not be allowed the right to a fair hearing. Deputy District Judge Ray-Crosby said: "It's a waste of public money." However, should there be a price ticket on justice, and if it's such a waste of public money, why are the Police wasting it?
The defendant alleges this is unlawful. He says he is entitled to question witnesses, as set out in Article 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998
Oddly enough, it is alleged that the decision was made by the Clerk to the Court, rather than the Deputy Judge. We have seen to original application of the defendant, where there is a NO, clearly written, and apparently not in the Judges handwriting. This application, which takes the form of a letter, was handed to the Judge by the Clerk, then handed back to the defendant, when he was told by the Judge, she would not issue the summons requested.
The question we would ask is, "If it's such a waste of public money, then why are the Sussex Police pursuing this parking ticket, spending their time seeking to gain a conviction, when the the alleged parking ticket was mis-served - or rather, not served properly if at all.
As with so many of the similar cases reported on this site, the defendants only ever get a fair hearing in a higher court and usually on appeal. The defendant alleges this case should never have been brought, since service was not properly effected. The defendant says he wrote to the Central Ticket office in Hove, pointing out the error, but that the station manager, Inspector Coll, said the matter should go ahead regardless. Apparently, the defendant also wrote to the Crown Prosecution Service pointing out the problem, but they too ignored the mis-service issue.
Eastbourne Magistrates Court
THE PLOT THICKENS
The defendant alleges that the roles were reversed back in 1997, where he was one of 12 Petitioners complaining about illegal activities within Wealden District Council. Wealden refused to look into the criminal complaints and passed the matter to Sussex Police. However it is alleged the Sussex Police did not investigate at all. The Petitioners claim they were not contacted.
However, some months later, Raymond Parsons, the then Leader of the Council read out a letter from the Sussex Police, saying they had investigated the matter and there was no case to answer. This stunned the Petitioners, who knew they had not been contacted.
Shortly after this the Chief Executive retired, taking with him an enhanced pension package. Then a few weeks later, another member of the public was speaking with Police officers at Hailsham Police Station, when these officers confided that there had been no investigation at all. They went on to reveal that the Council's Chief Executive had written the letter read out, himself. Apparently, he had used Police headed paper, then given the letter to Councillor Parsons to read out as if it had come from the Police officially.
It appears therefore that there may have been a conspiracy to pervert the course of justice. Now if that is the case, it is a serious matter. Anyone who interferes with the course of justice may become party to the crime. Especially, a Magistrate or a Judge.
The defendant points out: "The Courts have a duty to protect the right of the public, to a fair hearing." What do think about Irena Ray-Crosby's decision today? Did she protect the right of this defendant to call and question a witness to the parking ticket mix up? See Article 6. 3. (d) for details.
"And you must cut this flesh from off his breast: the law allows it, and the court awards it." - The Merchant of Venice
The Criminal Justice System is made up of a number of agencies. They include the following, listed with contact details which may be useful if you are seeking any further information.
for Constitutional Affairs:
Justice Service website:
Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO):
Office of Victim Support:
Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders:
The CPS Public Enquiry Point can provide general information on the CPS and advice on who to contact. The unit cannot give legal advice, but may be able to offer you practical information.
Our Communications Branch has a range of free publications about the CPS. Please contact your local CPS Area Office or contact:
You can get this leaflet in Braille, in other languages, or on audiotape. Contact your local CPS office for details.
Welcome to the Crown Prosecution Service website
The Crown Prosecution Service is responsible for prosecuting criminal cases investigated by the police in England and Wales. More about the CPS. The problem here is, that cases are very often not investigated by the Police. The scam here, is if the Police are covering up for someone, they refer a non file, a matter that has not been looked into, to the CPS, who naturally find there is no evidence. By this means it is the Police (many Masons) that control the criminal justice system.
Crown Prosecution Service case outcomes data by principal offence category for January 2006 is now available. More about case outcomes. The trouble with all these statistics, is that in light of the revelations above, how much faith can you put on the system.
Latest News - Press Releases
The Court of Appeal today upheld the convictions of Jack Whomes and Michael Steele for the murders of three men in Rettendon, Essex, 10 years ago. The court also upheld the conviction, for drug offences, of their co-defendant, Peter Corry. 22/2/2006
The Crown Prosecution Service welcomed the National Audit Office report on the CPS's effective use of magistrates' courts, published today, and issued its response. 15/2/2006
Prosecutors have been given detailed new guidance on dealing with disclosure issues concerning expert witnesses, as the result of a high-profile project chaired by the Director of Public Prosecutions. 14/2/2006
This site is free of © Copyright 2006 except where specifically stated. Any person may download, use and quote any reference or any link, and is guaranteed such right to freedom of information and speech under the Human Rights and Freedom of Information Acts. However, be aware that we cannot be held liable for the accuracy of the information provided. All users should therefore research matters for themselves and seek their own legal advice and this information is provided simply by way of a guide. Horse Sanctuary UK Limited.