AC 2.1: Explain the Requirements of the CPS for the Prosecution of Suspects
The Crown Prosecution Services (CPS) is the main public prosecutor in England and Wales. It was set
up in 1985 under the ‘Prosecution of Offences Act 1985’, and they decide if there is enough evidence
for a case to go to court. As part of their role, the CPS determines the appropriate charges in more
complex and serious cases, prepares case for court, and provides information, assistance, and
support to victims and prosecution witnesses. The CPS follows guidelines called the ‘Full Code Test’
(FCT), which is split into two parts. These are the ‘Evidential Test’ and the ‘Public Interest Test’.
The ‘Evidential Test’ (ET) happens before prosecuting and looks at if there is sufficient evidence to
potentially convict a suspect. Three questions must be asked to decide this:
1. Is the evidence allowed in court?
If the evidence cannot be used in court, then it cannot be used to convict a suspect. Therefore, if it is
allowed in court and the CPS believes it could help to secure a guilty verdict, the evidence will be
used in court.
2. Is the evidence reliable?
If the evidence is reliable, then it can be trusted. This might be because the evidence comes from a
reliable source, such as investigative officials or a trustworthy witness. If it is not reliable and
trustworthy, then it cannot be used in court.
3. Is the evidence credible?
If evidence is credible, it can be believed, but not necessarily always trusted. The CPS could analyse if
evidence is credible by, for example, comparing pieces of evidence to see if there are any
inconsistencies. If there are none, then the evidence can likely be considered credible.
A case study which the ET can be applied to is that of Damilola Taylor. He was a 10-year-old boy who
was killed in a block of flats after he was stabbed by a 12 and 13-year-old. The CPS should have
found that the evidence collected did not pass the ET, because they didn’t cross-reference all
available evidence effectively - otherwise, they would have found that the 14-year-old key witness
was lying about what she had seen. If the CPS had not allowed the case to pass the ET, the
inaccurate evidence wouldn’t have been used in court.
If the ET guidelines are met, the CPS moves on to the second stage of the FCT: the ‘Public Interest
Test’ (PIT). A decision must be made as to whether a prosecution is required in the public interest.
Another set of questions must be asked to decide this:
1. How serious is the offence?
A parking fine is not considered a serious crime, meaning it would not pass the PIT, as the driver
would not be seen as a danger to society. As well as this, murder could be compared to
manslaughter, and it would be considered more in the public interest to take a murder case to court
than a case of manslaughter.
2. What is the suspect’s level of culpability?
In other words – how blameable are they? For example, an offender who planned every decision
they made is much more blameable than an offender whose mental health plays a heavy part in the
actions they make.
3. What harm has the victim suffered?
This may be in the form of having lost their job, having been exploited, or in extreme cases they may
have been injured or killed. The higher level of harm a victim has suffered, the more that a
prosecution is required in the public interest.
4. Suspect’s age and maturity?
The age and maturity of a suspect can play an important part in how seriously they are convicted,
and sometimes if they are even convicted at all. If, for example, a 22-year-old and a 12-year-old
committed the same crime, the 12-year-old would be treated more leniently. This is because despite
The Crown Prosecution Services (CPS) is the main public prosecutor in England and Wales. It was set
up in 1985 under the ‘Prosecution of Offences Act 1985’, and they decide if there is enough evidence
for a case to go to court. As part of their role, the CPS determines the appropriate charges in more
complex and serious cases, prepares case for court, and provides information, assistance, and
support to victims and prosecution witnesses. The CPS follows guidelines called the ‘Full Code Test’
(FCT), which is split into two parts. These are the ‘Evidential Test’ and the ‘Public Interest Test’.
The ‘Evidential Test’ (ET) happens before prosecuting and looks at if there is sufficient evidence to
potentially convict a suspect. Three questions must be asked to decide this:
1. Is the evidence allowed in court?
If the evidence cannot be used in court, then it cannot be used to convict a suspect. Therefore, if it is
allowed in court and the CPS believes it could help to secure a guilty verdict, the evidence will be
used in court.
2. Is the evidence reliable?
If the evidence is reliable, then it can be trusted. This might be because the evidence comes from a
reliable source, such as investigative officials or a trustworthy witness. If it is not reliable and
trustworthy, then it cannot be used in court.
3. Is the evidence credible?
If evidence is credible, it can be believed, but not necessarily always trusted. The CPS could analyse if
evidence is credible by, for example, comparing pieces of evidence to see if there are any
inconsistencies. If there are none, then the evidence can likely be considered credible.
A case study which the ET can be applied to is that of Damilola Taylor. He was a 10-year-old boy who
was killed in a block of flats after he was stabbed by a 12 and 13-year-old. The CPS should have
found that the evidence collected did not pass the ET, because they didn’t cross-reference all
available evidence effectively - otherwise, they would have found that the 14-year-old key witness
was lying about what she had seen. If the CPS had not allowed the case to pass the ET, the
inaccurate evidence wouldn’t have been used in court.
If the ET guidelines are met, the CPS moves on to the second stage of the FCT: the ‘Public Interest
Test’ (PIT). A decision must be made as to whether a prosecution is required in the public interest.
Another set of questions must be asked to decide this:
1. How serious is the offence?
A parking fine is not considered a serious crime, meaning it would not pass the PIT, as the driver
would not be seen as a danger to society. As well as this, murder could be compared to
manslaughter, and it would be considered more in the public interest to take a murder case to court
than a case of manslaughter.
2. What is the suspect’s level of culpability?
In other words – how blameable are they? For example, an offender who planned every decision
they made is much more blameable than an offender whose mental health plays a heavy part in the
actions they make.
3. What harm has the victim suffered?
This may be in the form of having lost their job, having been exploited, or in extreme cases they may
have been injured or killed. The higher level of harm a victim has suffered, the more that a
prosecution is required in the public interest.
4. Suspect’s age and maturity?
The age and maturity of a suspect can play an important part in how seriously they are convicted,
and sometimes if they are even convicted at all. If, for example, a 22-year-old and a 12-year-old
committed the same crime, the 12-year-old would be treated more leniently. This is because despite
