• We have launched a public consultation on guidance for prosecutors dealing with retractions of rape and domestic violence allegations.
Individuals who retract truthful allegations out of fear are less likely to be prosecuted under the proposed new guidance for the offence of perverting the course of justice. But individuals who make malicious false allegations should know they risk prosecution.
See our press release and the consultation for full details.
• Jim Devine, former MP, has been convicted for theft by false accounting at Southwark Crown Court. Simon Clements, Head of the CPS Special Crime Division, said:
“Jim Devine submitted invoices for services that he had neither paid for nor received. In doing so, he took advantage of the trust that had been placed in him by virtue of the public office he held.
“Submitting a false invoice is plainly dishonest, regardless of why it has been done or who has done it. We say there is no excuse for such conduct and, with today’s conviction, it is clear the jury agreed.”
Devine was convicted on counts two and three of the indictment:
Count 2: False accounting, contrary to section 17(1)(b) of the Theft Act 1968. Value: £2,880.
James Devine, between 30 September 2008 and 31 May 2009, dishonestly, with a view to gain for himself or with intent to cause loss to another, in furnishing information for the purpose of making allowance claims produced or made use of documents required for an accounting purpose, namely two Form ACA2 claim forms, one Form PAAE2 claim form and three invoices in the name of Tom O’Donnell Hygiene & Cleaning Services, which to his knowledge were or may have been misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular, in that they purported to show that Tom O’Donnell Hygiene & Cleaning Services had provided and charged for the professional services described in the documents, when in fact the services had not been so provided or charged for.
Count 3: False accounting, contrary to section 17(1)(b) of the Theft Act 1968. Value: £5,505.
Jim Devine, between 1 March and 9 April 2009, dishonestly, with a view to gain for himself or with intent to cause loss to another, in furnishing information for the purpose of making allowance claims produced or made use of documents required for an accounting purpose, namely two Form Comms1 claim forms and two invoices in the name of Armstrong Printing Limited, which to his knowledge were or may have been misleading, false or deceptive in a material particular, in that they purported to show that Armstrong Printing Limited had provided and charged for the professional services described in the documents, when in fact the services had not been so provided or charged for.
Mr Devine was also acquitted of count one, which related to claims worth £360 in total for cleaning services.
• CPS Durham has advised Durham Police there is not enough new evidence under the double jeopardy provisions for the Director of Public Prosecutions to authorise an investigation into former GP Howard Martin, acquitted of the murder of three of his patients six years ago. Durham Chief Crown Prosecutor Chris Enzor said:
“The case was reopened by Durham Police after patients’ families complained about remarks made by Mr Martin in an interview with a national newspaper.
“The law was changed in 2005 to allow those who had been acquitted of serious offences to face a retrial in certain circumstances if there is new and compelling evidence. The law allows the police to make certain preliminary inquiries but the re-opening of an investigation needs the consent of the DPP, as does an application to the Court of Appeal for a retrial. It is for the Chief Crown Prosecutor to act as the channel between the police and the DPP.
“The police provided me with evidence given at the inquest into the deaths of three of Mr Howard’s patients: Mr Moss, Mr Weldon and Mr Gittins, as well as evidence from disciplinary proceedings of the General Medical Council. There were also copies of tapes and interview transcripts, obtained by a court order, following comments Mr Martin made to a reporter from the Daily Telegraph.
“The areas covered by the inquest and the GMC disciplinary proceedings were broadly the same as in Mr Martin’s trial and no materially new issues arose. Mr Martin’s interviews with the Daily Telegraph amounted overall to a continued denial, not an admission, of guilt.
“After careful consideration of this material, including discussion with leading counsel who prosecuted in the 2005 murder trial, I have decided that in these circumstances there is not sufficient new evidence, as the law requires, to warrant the conduct of an investigation which must the authorised by the DPP. I have advised the police of this.
“I appreciate this has been a distressing time for the families of Mr Moss, Mr Weldon and Mr Gittins and I have offered to meet with them to explain in greater detail the reasons for my decision.
“I have also looked to see whether there is any new evidence which might support a prosecution relating to certain other patients. These cases were looked at previously and it was decided at the time there was insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. In all of these cases, I have concluded that there is no new evidence to allow us to start criminal proceedings."
