Following an article in yesterday's Evening Standard, please see below the full statement that was provided to the paper.
Alison Saunders, Chief Crown Prosecutor for CPS London, said:
“We were first asked to make a formal charging decision on 8 September 2011 and we authorised a charge of conspiracy to rob against all three defendants the same day. It was clear that these were serious criminal acts and the case was given our full attention from the outset through to the convictions of the defendants.
“We endeavoured to answer the questions put to us by victims as fully as possible and offered to meet them in November 2011 to discuss their concerns. Info rmation was withheld only if it could have influenced the evidence that they might have given in court. At the conclusion of the trial, we met with those with concerns and their questions were answered fully and frankly.
“I have reviewed this case and I am clear that our staff were professional, thorough and correct at all times in their approach. The convictions and lengthy prison sentences that were obtained are a testament to the quality of their work.”
Additional information
On the selection of counsel
Alison Morgan, recently appointed by the Attorney General as Junior Treasury Counsel , is a highly respected and capable barrister, having acted as counsel in the trials of Dobson and Norris for the murder of Stephen Lawrence and those involved in the attempted suicide bombings on 21/7. The decision to appoint her was based solely on her seniority, expertise and skill, not a desire to save money, and she was assisted by junior counsel throughout.
On the independent review
Counsel was instructed to review the case on 3 November 2011 and advice was received shortly afterwards. The victims were informed that this review had been ordered in a letter from Alison Saunders on 18 November and made aware that it would not be appropriate to discuss the review’s outcome given that they could be called as witnesses.
On prosecuting particular allegations
Byom, Will iams and Lord were charged with conspiracy to rob in September 2011 under the Threshold Test. This test is applied when there is insufficient evidence to meet the standard under the Full Code Test (which requires sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction), but the evidence is expected to be become available soon afterwards. Applying the Full Code Test in November 2011, we decided that the evidence supplied by the police in relation to a small number of victims was insufficient to put forward as part of the prosecution case. We explained why we were not proceeding with these aspects of the case to those who raised concerns and made clear that we would reconsider if further evidence became available. In relation to one victim, the police provided the CPS and counsel with further evidence in January 2012 and we concluded that there was a realistic prospect of conviction to put an additional allegation before the jury as part of the conspiracy. We appreciate this is a complex legal process and gave a full explanation to the victims at the time of what had happened.
On the ‘exceptional issues of a nature not encountered previously’
The issue referred to was not related to the prosecution’s conduct of this case.
