CPS News Brief

Operation Elveden: CPS Charging Decision

Alison Levitt, QC, Principal Legal Advisor to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), oversees CPS decision making and all potential prosecutions in relation to the ongoing phone hacking investigations and other related matters.

Ms Levitt said:

"This statement is made in the interests of transparency and accountability to explain the decisions reached in respect of cases arising from Operation Elveden, which is the Metropolitan Police Service investigation into allegations involving the unlawful provision of information by public officials to journalists.

"This announcement relates to a file of evidence received from the Metropolitan Police Service. The full file of evidence was received by the CPS on 4 March 2013.

"We have concluded, following a careful review of the evidence, that Geoff Webster, who at the time of the alleged offending was Deputy Editor of The Sun newspaper, should be charged with two offences of conspiring to commit misconduct in public office, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977.

"The first offence relates to allegations that Mr Webster, between July 2010 and August 2011, authorised payments totalling £6,500 for information supplied by a public official to one of his journalists.

“The second offence relates to an allegation that in November 2010, Mr Webster authorised a payment of £1,500 for information provided by an unknown public official.

"All of these matters were considered carefully in accordance with the DPP's guidelines on the public interest in cases affecting the media. These guidelines require prosecutors to consider whether the public interest served by the conduct in question outweighs the overall criminality before bringing criminal proceedings.

"Accordingly, we have authorised the institution of proceedings and Mr Webster will appear before Westminster Magistrates' Court on 26 March 2013.

"May I remind all concerned that proceedings for a criminal offence involving Mr Webster will now be commenced and that he has a right to a fair trial. It is very important that nothing is said, or reported, which could prejudice that trial. For these reasons it would be inappropriate for me to comment further."

The full charges are as follows:

1. Between 4 July 2010 and 12 August 2011 conspired together with a public official, a journalist and others unknown to commit misconduct in a public office. Contrary to section 1(1) Criminal Law Act 1977

2. Between 3 and 6 November 2010 conspired together with a person or persons unknown to commit misconduct in a public office. Contrary to section 1(1) Criminal Law Act 1977

CPS decides no charges should be brought over hacking of Darwin emails

Malcolm McHaffie, Deputy Head of Special Crime at the Crown Prosecution Service, said:

“On 21 November 2012 Cleveland Police provided the CPS with a file of evidence in relation to Gerard Tubb, a Sky News journalist who, it was alleged, had accessed the email accounts of Anne and John Darwin. The Darwins were convicted of insurance fraud in 2008 over the faking of John Darwin’s death.

“In deciding whether any prosecutions should be brought, we carefully considered all the evidence in accordance with the Director of Public Prosecution’s guidelines for prosecutors on cases affecting the media. In accordance with these guidelines, provided there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction, the critical question prosecutors must ask is whether the public interest served by the conduct in question outweighs the overall criminality.

“On the evidence currently available it is not possible to ascertain whether the potential offence of unlawful interception of a communication was committed in the UK or the US. Although this may warrant further investigation, it has been decided under section 4.2 of the Code for Crown prosecutors that further investigations are not required as, in accordance with the DPP’s guidelines, we do not consider that any potential prosecution would be in the public interest.

“Having considered the factors set out in the guidelines on cases affecting the media, it is our view that the evidence indicates that the public interest served by the conduct in question outweighs the potential overall criminality, should an offence be proved. In reaching this decision, we took into account that the emails were accessed with a view to showing that a criminal offence had been committed and that a number of the same emails were subsequently lawfully obtained by the police and used by the prosecution at the criminal trial of Anne Darwin.”

Four charged with offences connected to local government election

Jane Wragg, Specialist Prosecutor handling Special Crime in the Crown Prosecution Service, said:

“After careful consideration of all the available evidence, I have concluded that four individuals should be charged over potential offences committed during the local government election for the Arboretum Ward of Derby on 3 May 2012.

“I have concluded there is sufficient evidence and that it is in the public interest to charge Tameena Ali and Samra Ali with the offence of personation, to charge Nasreen Akhtar with misconduct in public office and to charge Noshiela Maqsood with perverting the course of justice.

“These decisions were taken in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

“All four women will appear at Derby Magistrates’ Court on 15 April 2013.”

Background

Tameena and Samra Ali are cousins, whose fathers are brothers.

Nasreen Akhtar is sister to their fathers and Tameena and Samra’s aunt.

Noshiela Maqsood is of no relation to the other defendants in this case.