CPS News Brief

Decision of no further action against two journalists concerning allegations of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office

Gregor McGill, a senior lawyer at the Crown Prosecution Service said,

“The CPS has today decided in relation to two individuals, both journalists, that no further action will be taken concerning allegations of conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.

“A file was received from the Metropolitan Police Service on 23 January 2014. After careful consideration it has been decided that there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction. This decision has been made in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

“Any decision by the CPS does not imply any finding concerning guilt or criminal conduct; the CPS makes decisions only according to the test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors and it is applied in all decisions on whether or not to prosecute.”

For editors:

The CPS's function is not to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider. The CPS assessment of any case is not in any sense a finding of, or implication of, any guilt or criminal conduct. It is not a finding of fact, which can only be made by a court, but rather an assessment of what it might be possible to prove to a court, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

This assessment is based on the evidence available arising out of the police investigation and not on the evidence that is likely to be gathered by the defence, and likely to be used to test the prosecution evidence. The CPS charging decision is therefore necessarily an assessment on the basis of the evidence that is available to the CPS at the time the decision is made.

CPS prosecutors must also keep every case under review, so that they take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, including what becomes known of the defence case. If appropriate, the CPS may change the charges or stop a case.

Bedfordshire Police and Crime Commissioner to face no further action over alleged disclosure of sensitive information

Luke Bulpitt, a specialist prosecutor with the CPS Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division, said:

“In August 2014, the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) asked the CPS to consider whether Olly Martins, Bedfordshire’s Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC), should face a charge of misconduct in public office.

“This followed an allegation that Mr Martins made an unauthorised disclosure to his partner, when they were at home, of sensitive information passed to him in his role as PCC.

“After careful consideration and a review of the evidence in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, the CPS has decided that there is insufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction.

“In any case of misconduct in public office, we would have to show that any disclosure of information was serious enough to amount to an abuse of the public’s trust, particularly regarding the extent and likely consequences of the disclosure. The evidence is not sufficient to establish this.

“As a result, we have advised the IPCC that no further criminal action should be taken.

“Any decision by the CPS does not imply any finding concerning guilt or criminal conduct; the CPS makes decisions only according to the test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors and it is applied in all decisions on whether or not to prosecute.”

 

 

For editors:

The CPS's function is not to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider. The CPS assessment of any case is not in any sense a finding of, or implication of, any guilt or criminal conduct. It is not a finding of fact, which can only be made by a court, but rather an assessment of what it might be possible to prove to a court, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.

This assessment is based on the evidence available arising out of the IPCC investigation and not on the evidence that is likely to be gathered by the defence, and likely to be used to test the prosecution evidence. The CPS charging decision is therefore necessarily an assessment on the basis of the evidence that is available to the CPS at the time the decision is made.

CPS prosecutors must also keep every case under review, so that they take account of any change in circumstances that occurs as the case develops, including what becomes known of the defence case. If appropriate, the CPS may change the charges or stop a case.

One woman charged with encouraging or assisting suicide

For information: Emma Crossman died on 15 January 2014, having taken her own life using equipment that had allegedly been bought for her by her friend Milly Caller. The CPS has today [15 September 2014] charged Milly Caller with encouraging or assisting suicide.

Rosemary Ainslie, a senior lawyer at the CPS said:

“In July 2014 the CPS received a file concerning allegations in relation to the actions of Milly Caller, 22, from Sleaford, in the suicide of Emma Crossman, a 21 year old woman from Lincolnshire.

“Having carefully reviewed the evidence in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, the CPS has decided that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction, and that a prosecution is in the public interest. Accordingly I have today authorised the police to charge Milly Caller with one charge of encouraging or assisting suicide in that she provided equipment to Emma Crossman with the intent of encouraging or assisting suicide.

“Milly Caller will appear before Lincoln Magistrates’ Court on 16 October 2014.

“May I remind all concerned that criminal proceedings against Milly Caller will now be commenced and of her right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings."

Details of the full charge:

Amelia Caller

Encouraging or assisting suicide, contrary to section 2(1) of the Suicide Act 1961.

On a day between 12 January 2014 and 15 January 2014 you did an act capable of encouraging or assisting the suicide of another person, namely Emma Crossman, in that you provided equipment to Emma Crossman, and that act was intended to encourage or assist suicide or an attempt at suicide.

DPP welcomes convictions under pilot scheme of pre-recorded cross examination of victims

On September 10 2014, at Liverpool Crown Court, Jason John Wilson was convicted of eight counts of child sexual assault in a trial that heard pre-recorded cross examination of the victim. The victim’s evidence was pre-recorded as part of a pilot scheme to spare vulnerable victims the trauma of appearing in court. All witnesses under 16 years and those with a mental or physical disorder which is likely to result in their evidence being diminished are eligible for the pilot.

The conviction of Jason John Wilson follows the successful use of pre-recorded footage in three recent trials that lead to convictions.

Alison Mutch, the Deputy Chief Crown Prosecutor for CPS Mersey-Cheshire, leads on the pilot scheme for the CPS at Liverpool Crown Court. Ms Mutch said:

“This was an appalling case of child sexual abuse, starting when the victim was just five years old. The victim showed great courage in coming forward and re-living the horrific ordeal, providing evidence that was invaluable in securing this conviction. I would also like to thank colleagues from the police and Liverpool Crown Court for their professionalism and efficiency in dealing with this case, and the prosecutors in our rape and serious sexual offences unit should be commended for their dedication and sensitivity in their preparation of this case.”

Commenting on all of the convictions secured under the pilot to date, Alison Saunders, the Director of Public Prosecutions, said:

“The early pre-recording of cross-examination in these cases has spared the victims of sexual abuse, who were already deeply distressed by their experiences, from having to re-live that incident all over again in the sometimes daunting setting of a live criminal trial. Those who have suffered sexual assault are some of the most vulnerable victims we serve as prosecutors and this pilot involves particularly young victims called to give evidence. I am pleased that, by working with colleagues across the criminal justice system and pre-recording the cross examination, we were able to secure fair trials resulting in the successful convictions of a number of sexual offenders. I look forward to seeing the results from other pilot cases around the country in the future.”

Background

Jason John Wilson of Merseyside was convicted of six counts of sexual assault of a child contrary to section 7(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003, one count of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity contrary to section 8(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and one count of assault by penetration of a child contrary to section 6(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The assaults took place between November 2005 and November 2013. The cross examination was pre-recorded on 25 June 2014 under section 28 of the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 and then played to the jury in court at trial.

Three previous trials using pre-recorded cross examinations have successfully led to convictions under the new pilot scheme.

The details of these are outlined below:

1. A 42 year old man was convicted of sexual assault on 28 July and sentenced to nine years in jail on 1 September at Leeds Crown Court. The afore mentioned was convicted of five counts of sexual assault and two counts of sexual assault by penetration relating to a girl under 13, and one count of sexual assault by penetration relating to a boy under 13, contrary to sections 7(1) and 6(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. The offences took place in Armley, Leeds, during February of last year and the cross examination was pre-recorded on 7 May 2014. A co-defendant is awaiting trial.
   
   
2. 35 year old Craig Bennett was convicted after trial of two counts of sexual assault on a child and one count of inciting a child to engage in sexual activity. He was sentenced to 7 years imprisonment on 5 August. The trial took place at Leeds Crown Court on 28 July 2014 following the assaults on 11 or 12 October 2013. The victim’s cross examination was pre-recorded on 12 May 2014.
   
   
3. 51 year old Adrian Howard was convicted Liverpool Crown Court of 16 counts of child sexual abuse, including the rape of a girl under 13. The trial took place at Liverpool Crown Court on 30 July 2014 and the cross examination was pre-recorded on 8 May 2014.

Corporate manslaughter charge for death of crane driver

The CPS has today [Monday 15 September] announced that Baldwins Crane Hire Limited has been charged with corporate manslaughter following the death of Lindsay Easton.

On 15 August 2011 Mr Easton was driving a heavy crane down a steep road away from a Wind Farm at Scout Moor, Lancashire. During this journey it is alleged that the brakes failed. The crane crashed into an earth bank and fell from the road. The company had been carrying out work on wind turbines in the area.

Jane Wragg, specialist prosecutor in the Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division of the CPS, said:

“I have carefully reviewed the evidence gathered by Lancashire Police and the Health and Safety Executive during their investigation into the tragic death of Lindsay Easton. I have concluded that Baldwins Crane Hire Limited should be charged with an offence of corporate manslaughter.

“I have also concluded that there is sufficient evidence to charge the company Baldwins Crane Hire Limited with offences under Section 2 and Section 3 of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974.

“The first hearing will take place at Burnley Magistrates’ Court on 16 October 2014.

“May I remind all concerned that criminal proceedings against Baldwins Crane Hire Ltd. have now commenced and the company has the right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.

“These decisions were taken in accordance with the Code of Crown Prosecutors. We have decided there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest.”

Details of the charges:

1. Baldwins Crane Hire Limited on the 15th day of August 2011 being an organisation, namely a corporation, because of the way in which the organisation’s activities were managed or organised, caused the death of a person, namely Lindsay Easton, contrary to section 1 of the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007

2. Baldwins Crane Hire Limited, between the 1st day of January 2010 and the 16th day of August 2011, being an employer within the meaning of the Health and Safety at Work etc. Act 1974, failed to discharge the duty imposed on it under Section 2 of the Act by failing to ensure so far as reasonably practicable, the health, safety and welfare at work of its employees including Lindsay Easton Contrary to section 33(1)(a) of that Act.

3. Baldwins Crane Hire Limited, between the 1st day of January 2010 and the 16th day of August 2011, being an employer within the meaning of the Health and Safety at Work Act 1974, failed to discharge the duty imposed on it under Section 3 of the Act, by failing to conduct its undertaking in such a way as to ensure, so far as reasonably practicable, that persons not in its employment who may be affected thereby were not thereby exposed to risks to their health and safety. Contrary to section 33(1)(a) of that Act.