Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government
Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government Report and Recommendations - Scottish Government
Annex AFiscal) to assess these cases. This work started on 20 June 2011 and finished 8 July2011, with the two fiscals taking ten working days over the three week period tocomplete it. The costs for this work were met by the Review.The fiscals applied a two-stage test. First, they considered for each case whether therewould be sufficient evidence to prosecute if the corroboration requirement wereremoved. Secondly, they applied a qualitative test to the available evidence. Using themethods applied in England and Wales, they looked at the credibility and reliability ofthe available evidence and considered whether there was a reasonable prospect ofsecuring a conviction. In reading the tables it is important to remember that theremoval of the requirement for corroboration would not guarantee a conviction inthese cases.This research looked at the relatively small number of cases reported but marked forno proceedings. It cannot be determined how many cases the police did not report toCOPFS because there was obviously only one source of evidence and thereforeinsufficient for criminal proceedings.Table 1 lists the cases, broken down by crime type, where an accused person hadbeen placed on petition but his/her case was subsequently marked ‘no furtherproceeding due to insufficient evidence’. These have then been remarked by thefiscals engaged in the research to determine whether the cases would have proceededto trial on the basis that there would be a ‘reasonable prospect of conviction’, were therequirement for corroboration not a factor. These cases cover the whole of Scotlandfor the 2010 calendar year.374
Annex ATable 1TotalSufficient withoutcorroborationReasonableprospect ofconvictionNo. % No. % No. %Total 458 100 374 81.7 268 58.5Dishonesty 48 10.4 36 75 33 69Drugs 41 8.9 20 49 15 37Other 41 8.9 29 71 20 49RTA 1 0.2 1 100 1 100Sex – Non rape* 13 2.8 10 77 7 54Sex – Rape* 6 1.3 6 100 2 33Violence 308 67.2 272 88 190 62* Table 1 includes sexual cases where an accused person was placed on petition butthen marked for no further proceedings due to insufficient evidence. Table 2 coverscases that have been reported to National Sexual Crimes Unit but where the accusedwas not placed on petition due to lack of evidence. There are, therefore, sexualoffence cases that appear in both Tables 1 and 2 although the numbers are low.Table 2 provides information, covering the whole of Scotland for a six month periodfrom 1 July 2010 to 31 December 2010, on cases reported to the COPFS NationalSexual Crimes Unit but where an accused was not placed on petition. These have thenbeen ‘marked’ by the researching fiscals to determine whether the cases would haveproceeded to trial on the basis that there would have been a reasonable prospect of375
- Page 326 and 327: Wales, be regarded at least as an a
- Page 328 and 329: is so even if seasoned offenders ma
- Page 330 and 331: inquisitorial systems, what occurs
- Page 332 and 333: SCCRC. The Review believes that, in
- Page 334 and 335: jurisprudence, it must be recognise
- Page 336 and 337: Current Law8.1.5 A person convicted
- Page 338 and 339: introduced. Thus, as had been indic
- Page 340 and 341: Late Appeals (solemn cases)8.1.12 A
- Page 342 and 343: Summary cases8.1.16 In summary proc
- Page 344 and 345: emedy is provided for by law” 49
- Page 346 and 347: ConsiderationSolemn Appeals8.1.23 T
- Page 348 and 349: why the application is late 66 . Fu
- Page 350 and 351: case may be, by advocation against
- Page 352 and 353: e achieved by amendment of section
- Page 354 and 355: power ought to be retained on the b
- Page 356 and 357: 354
- Page 358 and 359: Thus, where there is a change of la
- Page 360 and 361: have his/her case referred back to
- Page 362 and 363: 8.2.9 It was perceived that there w
- Page 364 and 365: interests of justice, should be con
- Page 366 and 367: conviction be quashed. This applies
- Page 368 and 369: for undermining the important role
- Page 370 and 371: References to the High Court8.2.25
- Page 372 and 373: 370
- Page 374 and 375: 372Annex A
- Page 378 and 379: Annex Aconviction, were the rule of
- Page 380 and 381: 378Annex A
- Page 382 and 383: Annex BRight of access to a lawyer
- Page 384 and 385: Annex BRight of access to a lawyer
- Page 386 and 387: Annex BPolice questioning after cha
- Page 388 and 389: 386Annex C
- Page 390 and 391: 388Annex D
- Page 392 and 393: Annex ELondon - 18 th -19 th May 20
- Page 394 and 395: Annex EConsultative Meetings - cont
- Page 396 and 397: Annex ESubgroup & individual meetin
- Page 398 and 399: Annex ESubgroup & individual meetin
- Page 400 and 401: Annex EConferences/SeminarsLord Car
- Page 402 and 403: Annex FTable 2 - Organisations that
- Page 404 and 405: Annex GUnited Kingdom Parliament -
- Page 406 and 407: Annex GCases referred to in this Re
- Page 408 and 409: Annex GGordon v HM Advocate 2010 SC
- Page 410 and 411: Annex GParker v The Queen [2007] NT
- Page 412 and 413: Annex GBooks (continued)Title Autho
- Page 414: Annex GArticles (continued)Title Au
Annex ATable 1TotalSufficient withoutcorroborationReasonableprospect ofconvictionNo. % No. % No. %Total 458 100 374 81.7 268 58.5Dishonesty 48 10.4 36 75 33 69Drugs 41 8.9 20 49 15 37Other 41 8.9 29 71 20 49RTA 1 0.2 1 100 1 100Sex – Non rape* 13 2.8 10 77 7 54Sex – Rape* 6 1.3 6 100 2 33Violence 308 67.2 272 88 190 62* Table 1 includes sexual cases where an accused person was placed on petition butthen marked for no further proceedings due to insufficient evidence. Table 2 coverscases that have been reported to National Sexual Crimes Unit but where the accusedwas not placed on petition due to lack of evidence. There are, therefore, sexualoffence cases that appear in both Tables 1 <strong>and</strong> 2 although the numbers are low.Table 2 provides information, covering the whole of Scotl<strong>and</strong> for a six month periodfrom 1 July 2010 to 31 December 2010, on cases reported to the COPFS NationalSexual Crimes Unit but where an accused was not placed on petition. These have thenbeen ‘marked’ by the researching fiscals to determine whether the cases would haveproceeded to trial on the basis that there would have been a reasonable prospect of375
Change language