BBC 4 The prosecutors : crime and punishment

[soulbug]

Just thought it worth mentioning a new 3 part documentary started yesterday on BBC 4, you should be able to watch via catch up online, I have just started watching the first episode.

A fly on the wall documentary about the Crown prosecution services


Very insightful.

[carrot tops]

My theory is that the CPS are so worried about their image that they think appearing to explain themselves will drag their awful reputation off the floor.

Watched it and thought their logic seemed good. What would be really interesting would be if they showed an example of someone found not guilty in court and and looked at the discrepancy between evidence given to police and that presented by the prosecutors.

I wonder if the series will ever show the CPS being happy not to prosecute rape allegations because the evidence suggests the complainant it lying. My guess is it won't . Still, maybe there is a hope one of them will shoot themselves in the foot. Or maybe it will be so scripted that they'll appear above reproach.

[can it get worse]

I intend catching up with this series but agree with you CT. I am assuming it is merely going to be publicity stunt.

I'm loosing hope of a documentary which exposes their tactics of hiding evidence which assists the defence.

[Cazzle18]

I watched it and laughed out loud when the y said they needed two things to charge 1) Evidence (that's the bit that made me laugh!....the only evidence for my brother's trial was the DVD's that proved the FA was lying!) 2) In the public's interest !!

I don't know if it's actually worth it but, I'm putting in a formal complaint when the trial is over.... I want to know what 'evidence' they decided to charge him on !

The witness statements are laughable.... inconsistencies on every page....different to what they were saying on the page before

[carrot tops]

Good on you Cazzle if you put in a formal complaint. If it were down to me alone I would in our case.

[slowdown73]

I watched the first episode tonight which provided me with an insight regarding how the CPS works. I didn't realise they have so many different meetings and involve lots of different people in their decision making process. Basically, there is a whole team of people who will be aware of the allegation made against me. Furthermore, it seems the CPS even try to push cases forward to court even when they have doubts about whether there is enough evidence to get a conviction. For me, this is just a waste of tax payers money and unfair on the poor people who are falsely accused and have their names dragged through the media and end up having the stress and financial cost of a court case plus not to mention the irreparable damage caused to their reputation and lives.

[Bartat]

It will be interesting to see the remaining 2 programmes

it seemed to me the 2 cases we were show were quite black and white, the incidents did happened and we were shown visual evidence of the outcomes, however still one of the robbers got aqquitted.

I can see how these ceases were brought to trial but like many of ours how can they bring an historical case to trial with no evidence? Just word of mouth, one statement against another especially after a long period of time, when memories fail and there are no witnesses or cctv, but I guess we won't see such a case or case debate.

Also I don't think we will see the consequences of a false charge, the break up of the accused families, the lose of a job or the mental illnesses we face or the financial cost which can never be recovered and which takes many years to pay off.

Let's wait and see.

[soulbug]

The last part this week and one of the cases was a historical sex abuse case.

The CPS said of historical sex cases "if the accusers give a credible description of what happened to them and they are reliable witnesses, who are we not to prosecute ".

"we look at the evidence and if we think there is enough evidence to prosecute, then I think it's in the public interest to prosecute sex offender"

Firstly,often the only evidence is the words of the accuser / accusers in most historical cases

But the 2nd statement, is accusersing in its nature, as the accused has not yet had there day in court.

The whole statement sums up what a lot of people seemed to know or feel about how they are been treated once accused. Basically presumed guilty until proven innocent and how can nothing but words be used against them in such a serious situation, this simply adds upto a very low level of evidence that is required considering the gravitas of the whole scenario.

[YearsOfHell]

I remember studying "to kill a mockingbird" at school and we were made to believe that this idea of "guilty til proven innocent" had gone from modern society.
We were taught that the conclusion of the matter in the book is NOT how things played out in modern society and these cases are now a fair and just part of life in the 20th century (as it was then - I was young!)
But things are not different in real cases.
The whole system is wrong.
The justice system is flawed and it'll take more fixing than any of us mere mortals are capable of.
The police are overworked and their policies stink.
The only thing we can do is hope beyond hope that the truth is seen on the day and try and cope with the consequences if not.
A complete and utter mess.
YoH