AC2.1
The Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 led to the establishment of the CPS. It outlined how it would
work, stated that the CPS should take over criminal proceedings, and described the specific code for
the prosecution process. The CPS is there to protect, support, and deliver justice, ensuring that the
correct person is prosecuted. It has the decision of whether to charge someone as well as for
preparing and presenting cases. It is responsible for prosecuting in England and Wales. It also advises
the police, reviews their cases, and chooses charges in serious or complex cases.
Before the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the police had the charging role, meaning they made the
decision about whether to prosecute someone. At this time, the CPS only had an advisory role. This
act gave the charging role to the CPS so that prosecutors now decide whether to charge in most
cases. This change occurred as it was felt that there was too much bias when police were making the
decision. Some minor summary offences can still be charged by the police, but they still must contact
the CPS to check.
The Full Code Test is used to choose which cases to prosecute. If a case fails at either stage, it won’t
proceed. First there is the Evidential Test which asks if evidence is admissible, reliable, and credible.
If the case passes this stage, it goes on to the Public Interest Test in which 7 things are considered
such as severity of harm to the victim (physical and psychological), and the culpability of the
suspect(s) – e.g. was there diminished responsibility and was harm intentional. For example, the
case of Logan Mwangi’s murder passed both stages leading to the prosecution of 3 suspects. Logan
was a 5-year-old boy whose corpse was found in a river near his home. Firstly, there was CCTV
evidence showing one of the suspects carrying Logan’s body towards the river where it was later
found. This is reliable as it is video footage, meaning it is not relying on someone’s view or memory
of what happened and there is no risk of cross-contamination. It is also credible as it clearly shows
what has happened so there is no question of whether it will be believed. The evidence is also
admissible as the CCTV was fairly obtained (e.g. it wasn’t secretly filmed). This all shows why it
passed the Evidential Test. This case also passed the Public Interest Test as there was huge harm to
the victim, causing him to lose his life, making it very serious. The suspects are very culpable, as
abuse had been going on against Logan for a long time before his death showing intent to harm. All 3
of the suspects have now been charged with murder.
The Threshold Test is sometimes used when a suspect didn’t pass the evidential test, but the
prosecutors still believe they should still be charged. There are 5 following conditions that must
apply for this to be successful, including: reasonable grounds to suspect the accused, and a chance
that further evidence could be obtained later. This test can also be used to see if someone should be
prevented from having bail due to the fear of a witness or intimidation.
The Prosecution of Offences Act 1985 led to the establishment of the CPS. It outlined how it would
work, stated that the CPS should take over criminal proceedings, and described the specific code for
the prosecution process. The CPS is there to protect, support, and deliver justice, ensuring that the
correct person is prosecuted. It has the decision of whether to charge someone as well as for
preparing and presenting cases. It is responsible for prosecuting in England and Wales. It also advises
the police, reviews their cases, and chooses charges in serious or complex cases.
Before the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the police had the charging role, meaning they made the
decision about whether to prosecute someone. At this time, the CPS only had an advisory role. This
act gave the charging role to the CPS so that prosecutors now decide whether to charge in most
cases. This change occurred as it was felt that there was too much bias when police were making the
decision. Some minor summary offences can still be charged by the police, but they still must contact
the CPS to check.
The Full Code Test is used to choose which cases to prosecute. If a case fails at either stage, it won’t
proceed. First there is the Evidential Test which asks if evidence is admissible, reliable, and credible.
If the case passes this stage, it goes on to the Public Interest Test in which 7 things are considered
such as severity of harm to the victim (physical and psychological), and the culpability of the
suspect(s) – e.g. was there diminished responsibility and was harm intentional. For example, the
case of Logan Mwangi’s murder passed both stages leading to the prosecution of 3 suspects. Logan
was a 5-year-old boy whose corpse was found in a river near his home. Firstly, there was CCTV
evidence showing one of the suspects carrying Logan’s body towards the river where it was later
found. This is reliable as it is video footage, meaning it is not relying on someone’s view or memory
of what happened and there is no risk of cross-contamination. It is also credible as it clearly shows
what has happened so there is no question of whether it will be believed. The evidence is also
admissible as the CCTV was fairly obtained (e.g. it wasn’t secretly filmed). This all shows why it
passed the Evidential Test. This case also passed the Public Interest Test as there was huge harm to
the victim, causing him to lose his life, making it very serious. The suspects are very culpable, as
abuse had been going on against Logan for a long time before his death showing intent to harm. All 3
of the suspects have now been charged with murder.
The Threshold Test is sometimes used when a suspect didn’t pass the evidential test, but the
prosecutors still believe they should still be charged. There are 5 following conditions that must
apply for this to be successful, including: reasonable grounds to suspect the accused, and a chance
that further evidence could be obtained later. This test can also be used to see if someone should be
prevented from having bail due to the fear of a witness or intimidation.
