Britain's longest trial
Discussion
....criminal trial....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39869370
Surely there has to be a way to avoid this scale of cost ? Why was so much evidence/deliberation required ? At what point do CPS do an economic project of the likely cost, or is their remit purely on chance of success for public interest ?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39869370
Surely there has to be a way to avoid this scale of cost ? Why was so much evidence/deliberation required ? At what point do CPS do an economic project of the likely cost, or is their remit purely on chance of success for public interest ?
Speed 3 said:
....criminal trial....
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39869370
Surely there has to be a way to avoid this scale of cost ? Why was so much evidence/deliberation required ? At what point do CPS do an economic project of the likely cost, or is their remit purely on chance of success for public interest ?
320 days of evidence. 29 charges, so just over 10 days of evidence per charge. All complicated charges - fraudulent debt-recovery/equity-release schemes, with false identities and various other allegations.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-39869370
Surely there has to be a way to avoid this scale of cost ? Why was so much evidence/deliberation required ? At what point do CPS do an economic project of the likely cost, or is their remit purely on chance of success for public interest ?
<shrug> What's the alternative? Say "Ah, soddit - too hard, let 'em get away with it"? Or just presume that they're guilty?
It's unusual but I like the idea complex fraudsters can be brought to justice.
Cost forms a part of the 'public interest' element i.e. this is the one for the CPS (it's not the CPS in Scotland but I imagine they operate in a similar manner):
Cost forms a part of the 'public interest' element i.e. this is the one for the CPS (it's not the CPS in Scotland but I imagine they operate in a similar manner):
Public interest consideration said:
The cost to the CPS prosecution service and the wider criminal justice system, especially where it could be regarded as excessive when weighed against any likely penalty (Prosecutors should not decide the public interest on the basis of this factor alone. It is essential that regard is also given to the public interest factors identified when considering the other questions in paragraphs 4.12 a) to g), but cost is a relevant factor when making an overall assessment of the public interest).
https://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/code_for_crown_prosecutors/codetest.html TooMany2cvs said:
320 days of evidence. 29 charges, so just over 10 days of evidence per charge. All complicated charges - fraudulent debt-recovery/equity-release schemes, with false identities and various other allegations.
<shrug> What's the alternative? Say "Ah, soddit - too hard, let 'em get away with it"? Or just presume that they're guilty?
But what effect does the 29 individual charges give - I see concurrent sentencing all the time so why not just concentrate on a handful that need to be scrutinised in court and add in the "other likely cases of guilt" card for sentencing ? Get the case over in a few months for the same outcome.<shrug> What's the alternative? Say "Ah, soddit - too hard, let 'em get away with it"? Or just presume that they're guilty?
V8 Fettler said:
How does any juror maintain the necessary level of concentration for that period of time?
£7.5m is chicken feed compared to the £60m blown on the " London Underground Jubilee Line case" referred to in the article.
Sadly though one has to ask the question as to whether it is wise to have a 7.5MM trial with £2.4M legal aid to prosecute a fraud by him of £1.6Mil and her less than £200k.£7.5m is chicken feed compared to the £60m blown on the " London Underground Jubilee Line case" referred to in the article.
Of course the answer is, they may have carried on and need to be a warning to others etc. £2.4M legal aid though?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff