You see, there's no substitute for a red-faced Superintendant facing the media and explaining why he allowed someone to be charged for calling a police horse 'gay'. Or eating an apple whilst waiting at a red light. Named and responsible senior police officers will soon learn from what the psychologists term 'negative reinforcement' exactly what are and what are not acceptable prosecutions.
Wednesday, 19 May 2010
Police should determine charging for ALL non-indictable offences
There is good news in that Theresa May is extending the power of the Police to make charging decisions on minor offences without reference to the CPS. I'd like to see this extended to cover all non-indictable offences - something like 90% of all criminal prosecutions, from memory.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
And, of course, explaining why Mr X was not charged for the 30th offence. I would also like to see magistrates and crown court judges held accountable in some way for their sentencing.
You're on form this morning Mr. R.
Rather than post three comments, I'll just say:
Hear Hear!
Hear Hear!
Hear Hear!
Lang may yer lum reek.
Sorry. Weekend Yachtsman has beat me to it!
In the old days when the Police decided the offences and if necessary they employed a local solicitor to attend court. If they felt he wasn't getting enough convictions, they used another one. Solicitors liked to keep this work as it provided some regular income (and they were usually part of the local community and had a vested interest in local crime)
With the CPS deciding the charges, if they find they are not getting enough convictions to meet their targets, they simply start charging with lesser offences, downgrading for example murder to manslaughter or GBH to ABH. No one fires them!
It was supposed to be cheaper, but I'd love to see some now and then costs and rates of convictions!
Post a Comment