Points 2 Prove
The Ultimate Police Handbook
Prosecutors must only start or continue a prosecution when the case has passed both stages of the Full Code Test. The exception is when the Threshold Test may be applied.
The Full Code Test has two stages: i) the evidential stage; followed by ii) the public interest stage.
It should be applied: when all outstanding reasonable lines of inquiry have been pursued; or prior to the investigation being completed, if the prosecutor is satisfied that any further evidence or material is unlikely to affect the application of the Full Code Test, whether in favour of or against a prosecution.
In most cases prosecutors should only consider whether a prosecution is in the public interest after considering whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute. However, there will be cases where it is clear, prior to reviewing all the evidence, that the public interest does not require a prosecution. In these instances, prosecutors may decide that the case should not proceed further.
Prosecutors should only take such a decision when they are satisfied that the broad extent of the criminality has been determined and that they are able to make a fully informed assessment of the public interest. If prosecutors do not have sufficient information to take such a decision, the investigation should continue and a decision taken later in accordance with the Full Code Test set out in this section.
The Evidential Stage
|
|
Prosecutors must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against each suspect on each charge. They must consider what the defence case may be, and how it is likely to affect the prospects of conviction. A case which does not pass the evidential stage must not proceed, no matter how serious or sensitive it may be |
|
|
The finding that there is a realistic prospect of conviction is based on the prosecutors objective assessment of the evidence, including the impact of any defence and any other information that the suspect has put forward or on which they might rely. It means that an objective, impartial and reasonable jury or bench of magistrates or judge hearing a case alone, properly directed and acting in accordance with the law, is more likely than not to convict the defendant of the charge alleged. This is a different test from the one that the criminal courts themselves must apply. A court may only convict if it is sure that the defendant is guilty. |
|
|
When deciding whether there is sufficient evidence to prosecute, prosecutors should ask themselves the following: |
Can the evidence be used in court?
Prosecutors should consider whether there is any question over the admissibility of certain evidence. In doing so, prosecutors should assess:
|
|
The likelihood of that evidence being held as inadmissible by the court; and |
|
|
The importance of that evidence in relation to the evidence as a whole |
Is the evidence reliable?
|
|
Prosecutors should consider whether there are any reasons to question the reliability of the evidence, including its accuracy or integrity |
Is the evidence credible?
|
|
Prosecutors should consider whether there are any reasons to doubt the credibility of the evidence |
Is there any other material that might affect the sufficiency of evidence?
|
|
Prosecutors must consider at this stage and throughout the case whether there is any material that may affect the assessment of the sufficiency of evidence, including examined and unexamined material in the possession of the police, and material that may be obtained through further reasonable lines of inquiry. |