Any criminal law barristers or crown court advocates who wouldn’t mind answering a question about the CPS?

[Hanlonsamazer]

I know it’s not legal advice etc, just something bothering me and I’d like to know if it’s normal.

Can you tell us a bit about the issue that's bothering you?

May not need lawyers etc; just folks who know stuff.

I’d just like to know how common it is for the CPS to ignore the judge’s direction to investigate something (and gain expert evidence). And whether that’s “absolutely fine and up to the CPS” or whether it’s going to make the judge say - “you don’t know what you’re talking about and lead to the case collapsing”.

Thank you.

@Bromptotoo thank you for replying!!

Judges are supposed to be neutral. They direct according to the law, but they cannot tell either the prosecution or the defence how to conduct their case.

Thank you. I think I’ve got that but if they say to one side… you need “X” to make your case and that side say “no”. Then what happens? Can it just proceed to trial anyway or will they be expected to explain why they said no.

A judge does not have the right to refuse a trial. If they aren't happy they can step aside. But they have no right to instruct either side. They rule neutrally on law. They could advise a jury on the law in relation to a specific point. They don't tell lawyers what to present in court.

How does that apply to dismissal applications? If they said to the CPS (which they did) “you need expert evidence to define what that term means in real life”. And the CPS say no, when the next dismissal hearing takes place and the CPS still cant define what that term means… surely that’s valuable evidence which is wasted because if the judge can’t understand it without an expert, how will the jury?

Your enquiry may be partly answered with this guide https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/expert-evidence

Thank you @Museum1066 but the CPS have flat out said: no experts. The content is really interesting! And I wish there was an expert! But they have said no. Despite the police officer saying in his statement that he’s not trained in digital forensics. So I’m just concerned there will be facts missing and the judge will not look kindly on it!

Ah I see, apparently from a bit of research its generally uncommon for the crown prosecution service to disregard a judges direction , judges instructions are critical for a fair and through legal process, if the CP's fails to comply then it may raise concerns about the strength if the case and the prosecution's adherences to legal procedure, however as to the outcome that depends on the nature of the case and the significance of the ignored directives

I’m so grateful for your reply @Museum1066. Thank you. I have googled the heck out of it but there’s not much for the laywoman.

That’s brilliant. Again. Thank you.

Just bumping this in case anyone sitting with a pot of tea and the Sunday papers has a view!

So I think you're on the prosecution side, that doesn't matter just that the defence can instruct experts. I do know a little about this area and I totally know that officers aren't necessarily trained in this. The judge is there to ensure the law is adhere to, not to give an opinion. But, that's not to say they never do.

Ok, so we are dealing with an application from the defence to dismiss the case. The judge is therefore being asked to decide if the prosecution evidence is insufficient to allow a reasonable court to convict the defendant. Contrary to some posts up thread, the judge does not have to allow the case to proceed to trail. If the judge decides the evidence is insufficient, they will dismiss the case.

It sounds like the judge has suggested the prosecution need expert evidence to support part of their case. That doesn't necessarily mean the judge will dismiss the case if the CPS refuse to get expert evidence, but it clearly makes it more likely.

My take is similar to that of @prh47bridge. A Judge can dismiss a case, usually after hearing the prosecution evidence, on the basis that no properly instructed jury could convict. Technically, I think he orders the jury to acquit.

It's also possible he could hear legal argument at the outset, in the absence of the jury and direct no case to answer or similar.

Or he can let the whole thing proceed and direct the jury in such a way that the 'route to verdict' would lead them to acquit.

It sounds as though the defence are angling for one or another of those directions.

Amazing. Thank you so much. I understand better now.

Criminal lawyer here - if it's the magistrates court it is REALLY common for the Cps to ignore directions of the court. Honestly, it's constant. I often make 'abuse of process' arguments due to this.

Less common in the crown court and more likely the pressure of a missed direction could lead to the Cps discontinuing the case.

If there's no evidence the defence could say there's 'no case to answer' or make a half time submission (after the prosecution have finished calling their evidence)

@legalseagull brilliant username!

Do you have a view on why they ignore? Is it cost? Time?

This would be the third time the judge has given instructions so I wonder how it will go down at the hearing. It is literally the only piece of evidence to support the case which needs expert opinion so I’m interested to see how it progresses.

Thank you again.

Often it's limited resources of the crown. They're overworked and leave everything to the last minute. It's not unusual for the prosecutor to turn up and offer no evidence on the day of trial itself.
Alternatively your advocate can make an abuse of process argument to stay the case

Your welcome,