The Crown Prosecution Service

Established by the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 and headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (currently Stephen Parkinson). Independent of the police and of government, though it operates under the superintendence of the Attorney General. It receives files from the police and decides whether to prosecute, what charges to bring, and how to run the case. It is not the police's lawyer.

Every charging decision must satisfy the Full Code Test in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. It applies at the point of charge and must be continuously reapplied throughout the prosecution as the evidence picture changes. Two stages must both be satisfied: evidential first, then public interest.

The evidential stage

There must be sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction, i.e. a jury or bench properly directed is more likely than not to convict on the evidence available. It is an objective test, not a measure of the prosecutor's personal belief in guilt. The current Code requires prosecutors to consider disclosure as part of the evidential stage: a charging decision should be deferred if unrecovered or unexamined material may affect the realistic prospect of conviction.

The public interest stage

Even where the evidential stage is met, prosecution must be in the public interest. Factors for include seriousness, vulnerability of the victim, weapon use, premeditation. Factors against include minor role, genuine remorse, disproportionate impact on the defendant's health. Neither list is exhaustive. Prosecution is not always required even where the evidence supports it.

A limited alternative where the Full Code Test cannot yet be met but there are substantial grounds to object to bail. It requires reasonable suspicion, substantial bail grounds, and immediate public interest in charging. A case charged under the Threshold Test must be reviewed against the Full Code Test as soon as reasonably practicable; if not met, the prosecution must discontinue.

The CPS has extensive disclosure obligations under the Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996. It must disclose any material that might reasonably undermine the prosecution case or assist the defence. The obligation is continuing. Where police device examinations have produced nothing incriminating, that information is disclosable. The Code now ties disclosure to the evidential stage, disclosure failures are not merely procedural errors, they affect whether the prosecution should proceed at all.

The CPS must reapply the Full Code Test whenever the evidence picture changes significantly: new evidence, expert reports, defence case statements, witness changes. A prosecution that satisfied the Test at charge may no longer satisfy it by trial. Where it doesn't, the CPS is obliged to discontinue.

The CPS can discontinue at any point before verdict, on evidential or public interest grounds, by offering no evidence. No finding of guilt or innocence. The defendant can ask for written reasons; the CPS is not obliged to provide detailed ones but usually states whether the basis is evidential or public interest.

Where the CPS decides not to charge, to discontinue, or to offer no evidence, a victim can ask for that decision to be reviewed under the VRR scheme. The review is conducted by a prosecutor not previously involved. If the original decision was wrong the CPS can reverse it and reinstate the prosecution where time and evidence allow.