Damning verdict on capital's justice

Lacklustre prosecutors, absent police officers and reluctant witnesses are all contributing to the collapse of thousands of serious criminal cases in London each year, a study of the capital's justice system reveals today.

The detailed analysis exposes glaring flaws in the way the Crown Prosecution Service and police work together to bring criminals to justice.

The report by Her Majesty's Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate reveals failings in management of the service, bad performances in court by prosecutors and unwillingness to engage with victims and witnesses.

The consequence is that more than 20,000 of the CPS's 156,000 annual caseload are discontinued. But the serious failures also undermine public confidence in the system.

The inspectors looked at 345 cases stopped by the prosecution in the magistrates' court and found that 35.9 per cent failed because the prosecution could not proceed.

Four key problems were identified: 41 per cent of cases fell because a victim or witness refused to testify; 31 per cent were halted because the case was not ready and magistrates refused an adjournment; 15 per cent collapsed when civilian witnesses failed to turn up at court; and 13 per cent of cases could not go ahead because police witnesses did not show up.

The problem begins with the performance of the Metropolitan Police - only 15 per cent of recorded crimes are detected. But even where police charge a suspect, the CPS inspectorate found "specific difficulties with quality of a substantial proportion of police files".

Then when cases reach the CPS, inspectors found "basic case management systems were foundering" in many of the 13 branches covering London's 27 magistrates' courts and 12 crown courts.

Correspondence or materials sent by police are routinely not linked to files, a factor in delays which so frustrate magistrates asked to grant repeated adjournments.

In court, the quality of prosecutors' performances varies wildly. Of 124 lawyers studied in magistrates' and youth courts, 17 were branded " lacklustre", "less than competent" or "very poor indeed". None was marked "outstanding" and only 21 performed to "very good" or "above average".

The quality of advocacy was little better in the crown court, where 37 out of 49 lawyers were competent, eight were considered very good or above average and four were "lacking in presence or lacklustre".

The inspectors praised the quality of decision-making at the early stage of cases in London but said good work is being undone by failures in case management and preparation.

CPS staff in more serious cases are also condemned for their attitude to victims and witnesses. One witness described waiting outside court to give evidence for four days with no explanation from the CPS.

And despite government moves to put witnesses and victims at the heart of the criminal justice system, prosecution lawyers rarely speak to them.

The report also highlights the reluctance to engage with a government pilot scheme where CPS staff are supposed to explain their actions in cases where charges are dropped or substantially altered.

Internal documents leaked last year revealed that Crown lawyers had made clear that they did not want to meet victims of rape, racism and violent assault to tell them face-to-face why charges had been dropped.

Apart from the heavy workload, they claimed that their own personal safety is at risk. Today's study shows that staff at CPS London's Camberwell branch "declined to participate" in the scheme.