CPS News Brief

Clarification of recent reporting in relation to the case of Paul Gambaccini

 

The CPS did not “sit” on a file of evidence against Paul Gambaccini as reported, but made a decision in his case around one month after all the evidence had been received from police on 4 September. While we received initial papers in February 2014 further investigation was necessary in order to properly consider the case.

It is also not right to imply that any decision making was timed in relation to other cases – this would only have been relevant if it had been decided to bring charges which was, of course, not the case in this instance.

Spending almost a year on police bail is of course, difficult, and a matter we do not take lightly, but it is vital that the CPS considers all the evidence in a case – both that which strengthens a case and that which undermines it - so that the right decision can be made, as happened in this case.

This information, along with further detail, has been provided to the Home Affairs Select Committee.

This is the first time that the CPS has used Mr Gambaccini’s name in relation to this case as our firm policy is not to name suspects unless they are charged – unless there are exceptional circumstances.

CPS authorises further charges in relation to death of Becky Watts

The Crown Prosecution Service has today authorised Avon and Somerset Police to charge a further four people in connection with the death of 16 year old Becky Watts.

Rachael Scott, head of the CPS South West Complex Casework Unit said:

“Having carefully reviewed all the evidence presented to me by Avon and Somerset police, I have today authorised them to charge Karl Demetrius, Jaydene Parsons, Donavon Demetrius and James Ireland with assisting an offender. The defendants remain in custody and are due before Bristol Magistrates’ Court this afternoon.

“I must remind you that proceedings are now ongoing and the defendants have the right to a fair trial. It is very important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.

“The CPS has worked closely with Det Supt Tunks and her team within the Avon and Somerset police during this complex investigation and will continue to do so until this prosecution is concluded.”

 

CPS decision making in the case of Abid Naseer

In 2009, the Crown Prosecution Service was asked to consider potential charges of preparation of terrorist acts, contrary to section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006, and conspiracy to commit terrorist acts, in relation to Abid Naseer. Each decision made by the CPS is considered in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors. The Code requires that in order for a prosecution to take place, there must be sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction, meaning that a conviction is more likely than not. In this case, the CPS concluded that there was insufficient evidence to prosecute these alleged offences.

A CPS spokesperson said:

“The evidence in our possession in relation to Abid Naseeer which would have been admissible in a criminal court was very limited. Crucially, there was no evidence of training, research or the purchasing of explosives. We had no evidence of an agreement between Abid Naseer and others which would have supported a charge of conspiracy in this country.

“The evidence used by the US authorities to extradite a suspect does not need to meet the same tests as set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. The CPS does not decide on extradition, but acts on behalf of the overseas party in the British court which decides if an extradition can be allowed.”

Sue Hemming, Head of Special Crime and Counter-Terrorism at the CPS, added:

“Whenever the evidence provided to us by counter terrorism police allows us to prosecute, we do so, with public safety paramount. Our record in successfully prosecuting terrorism, including large scale plots to kill, speaks for itself.

“But in order to prosecute, the law requires us to have sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and which allows us to comply with our duties of disclosure. Evidence must be admissible in a British court. In the case of Abid Naseer, the investigation did not provide that. We fully understand that police need to intervene early to protect the public, as they have explained in this case, but this does sometimes mean that the evidence required to prosecute is simply not available from the investigation.

“We have not seen all the evidence relied upon by American prosecutors and therefore it would be inappropriate for us to comment on it. However, it is clear from what is now in the public domain that they had material that we did not have access to at the time Abid Naseer was released from custody.

“The case remained under review as further evidence was collected but there was still insufficient evidence to prove any offence in this country prior to his extradition.”

Additional Information

In January 2010, the then Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, Lord Carlile QC, published a report into this case called ‘Operation Pathway'.

The test used by the American authorities to successfully extradite a suspect is based on an assessment of whether there was “probable cause” that the suspect committed the alleged offence. The threshold for this test is different than the one set for the CPS in considering a domestic prosecution, which requires “sufficient evidence of a realistic prospect of conviction.”

The CPS lawyers that decide on a domestic prosecution do not see the papers submitted by the American extradition request or vice versa.

The extradition court does not decide guilt or innocence but only whether extradition would be lawful. Extradition law is a matter for Parliament. Extradition can only be ordered by the court, which must consider all defence challenges including whether it would be compatible with the defendant’s human rights. The Scott Baker Review in 2012 concluded that UK’s extradition arrangements with the US were balanced and fair.

CPS authorises charges in relation to death of Becky Watts

The Crown Prosecution Service has today authorised Avon and Somerset Police to charge a 28-year-old man with the murder of 16 year old Becky Watts.

Rachael Scott, head of the CPS South West Complex Casework Unit said:

“The CPS has been in close contact with Avon and Somerset police as their extensive investigation into Becky’s disappearance developed. In particular I have been offering advice and guidance to the police since two people were arrested on Saturday.

"My role is to examine the evidence that is currently available and advise the police in respect of charges.

"Having carried out a detailed review of the evidence gathered by Avon and Somerset Police, my conclusion is that there is sufficient evidence to charge Nathan Matthews with the murder of Becky Watts.

"I have also concluded that there is sufficient evidence to charge Shauna Hoare with attempting to pervert the course of justice.

"I have therefore today authorised Avon and Somerset police to charge them with these offences and they will appear before Bristol Magistrates' Court tomorrow morning.

"Proceedings are now ongoing and the defendants have the right to a fair trial. It is very important that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings."

The four men and one woman who were arrested on Monday on suspicion of assisting an offender remain in police custody at this time.

Polly Chowdhury and Kiki Muddar convicted of manslaughter

Polly Chowdhury and Kiki Muddar were convicted today at the Central Criminal Court of the manslaughter of eight-year-old Ayesha Ali. Ayesha was Polly Chowdhury’s daughter and lived with her mother and Kiki Muddar in a flat in Romford.

Baljit Ubhey, CPS London Chief Crown Prosecutor, said: 

"Ayesha Ali died in her own home and was found to have more than 50 injuries to her body, including the head injury which caused her death. This is a place where she should have felt safe and loved but instead it was where she ultimately lost her young life.

"The manipulation and hatred directed towards Ayesha led to her being beaten and tormented for a number of months. The evidence showed that Ayesha was scared and intimidated in her own home.  

"Chowdhury and Muddar have now been brought to justice for this despicable crime."

CPS statement on Operation Doublet charges

 

The Crown Prosecution Service has authorised Greater Manchester Police to charge ten men with a wide range of sexual offences against girls under the age of 16. 

The offences include rape, conspiracy to rape, inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, sexual activity with a child and sexual assault.  They are alleged to have occurred between 2005  and 2013  and relate to eight female complainants.  The majority of offences took place when the complainants were aged under 16 at the time.

Nazir Afzal, Chief Crown Prosecutor, CPS North West said:

“The CPS has been working closely with investigators from Operation Doublet from an early stage in the investigation in connection with this case.  Having carefully considered all the evidence presented to us we have concluded that there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest to charge ten men with these offences and have authorised Greater Manchester Police to do so.

"These defendants now stand charged with serious criminal offences and have 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."

Two of the men, Afraz Ahmed and David Law, were remanded in custody and appeared at Bury Magistrates Court on 24th February.  Five men appear at Bury Magistrates Court on 3 March and the remaining three defendants appear at Tameside Magistrates Court on 4 March.

The defendants are:

David Law, charged with conspiracy to rape x 3 

Afraz Ahmed, charged with conspiracy to rape x 2; rape x 2; inciting a child to engage in sexual activity x 2

Kutab Miah, charged with sexual activity with a child x 3; rape x 1

Shayfur Rhaman, charged with rape x 1 

Marfus Rahman, charged with rape x 3; sexual activity with a child x 3

Mohammed Miah, charged with rape x 3; sexual activity with a child x 3 

Ashfaq Yousaf, charged with rape x 1; aiding and abetting rape x 1

Rehan Ali, charged with rape x 1; sexual activity with a child x 3

Iklaq Chaudhry, charged with sexual activity with a child x 3; rape x 2

Mohammed Davood, charged with sexual assault x 1; assault occasioning actual bodily harm x 1; rape x 3; sexual activity with a child x 1