Crown Crooked – MSPs to quiz £112m-a-year Scots prosecutors. OFTEN DESCRIBED as the most corrupt public body in all Scotland - the Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) – is to face a major investigation of it's purpose and role in prosecuting crime - by the Scottish Parliament's Justice Committee who want to hear from you by Wednesday 19 October 2016
Accused of being a haven of deceit, institutionally racist, sectarian, bigoted, prejudiced, corrupt, woefully incompetent and staffed with prosecutors who will - with ease - lie to victims of crime, misrepresent the facts in court, twist evidence of victims, witnesses and accused alike - this collection of swaggering lawyers and Crown Counsel who are paid a staggering £112.5 million of public cash this budget year to go after criminals - will now face questions on their own gangster-like existence in the annals of Scots Law.
The inquiry – which will take evidence in public during sessions of the Justice Committee over the coming months at Holyrood - will focus on the core role and examine the effectiveness and efficiency of the Crown Office, how well it works with its stakeholders, and the support it provides to witnesses and victims of crime.
The Committee will also examine its responsiveness to new challenges and opportunities, such as the evolving nature of crime and advances in technology. As part of the inquiry it will examine the role and function of the independent Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland.
Beware however – this is an enquiry which appears to focus more on questions of whether the Crown Office has enough resources – or the budget – to be effective at ‘fighting crime’.
Hands up those of you (not vested legal interests please) who believe £112.5 million of public cash a year - as part of an ever increasing budget - makes the Crown Office under budget or under resourced.
MSPs have also clarified the Justice Committee inquiry will not consider two other roles of the Crown Office – relating to establishing the cause of sudden, unexplained or suspicious deaths or investigating allegations of criminal conduct against police officers, except in relation to the general issue of whether the COPFS has the resources it needs to carry out its purpose.
This is a Crown Office gone bad – a prosecution service so rotten - the Scottish Government was forced to remove the law on double jeopardy to allow incompetent, often strange prosecutors – some with their own secret criminal histories - to bring persons before the court time and time again until convictions are eventually secured in front of increasingly worn out judges and juries.
The same Crown Office which shredded statistics on sectarian crime principally against Catholics and other religious minorities in Scotland shredded - to avoid being asked questions by MSPs considering the hated Offensive Behaviour at Football Matches & Threatening Communications Act and the impact of Scotland’s criminal justice system’s oh-so-obvious endemic religious bigotry.
The same Crown Office run by Prosecutors who present the deceased on witness lists at criminal trials.
The same Crown Office staffed by Prosecutors & employees who themselves have secret criminal records – on everything from assault, threats & perverting the course of justice to drugs offences.
The same Crown Office compromised by criminal informants among staff who leak details to crooks targeted by Police Scotland and other law enforcement agencies.
The same Crown Office who pride bonuses, junkets and higher salaries before obtaining justice for victims of crime.
The same Crown Office whose Advocate Depute did a runner from the High Court in 2007 during a major trial which resulted in the collapse of the first World’s End murder trial.
The same Crown Office run by a Lord Advocate who called into question the state of the judiciary in order to distract the public from Crown Office failures over the collapse of the same World’s End Trial -Top judge accused Lord Advocate of undermineg the judiciary in statements Angiolini made to the Scottish Parliament.
The same Crown Office which campaigned for the removal of Corroboration - one of the cherished few safeguards of Scots law which cuts across every and all criminal cases and evidence presentation in our courts and helps to guard against miscarriage of justice.
And by removing corroboration - not, for any lofty aim of upholding justice and protecting the public - mind you.
The singular vested interest of the Crown Office in removing corroboration from the justice system was, and remains simply because - the Crown Office are so inadequate at prosecuting crime, they must have multiple chances to parade people in court to secure convictions, no matter how much it costs taxpayers, the reputation of Scots law.
Enter the man - no less than the ex Dean of the Faculty of Advocates - James Wolffe QC - who wanted - and was handed the job of Lord Advocate - tasked with steering, spinning and manipulating the Crown Office through the choppy murky waters of Scotland’s criminal empires, and not forgetting his own staff’s secret criminal pasts.
The accompanying fanfare and typical public relations exercise of Wolffe’s appointment to succeed former Lord Advocate Frank Mulholland, came with the usual fluff of a new broom to sweep away crime and criminality.
Yet Wolffe himself was - only a few months before his new commission of protecting Scots from big time crime barons - fretting with Scottish Ministers over his precious Faculty of Advocates spending of £320,000 on parts of Parliament House it had occupied without recorded title - yet somehow gained ownership of, reported here: WOLFFE HALL: Papers reveal Council’s legal action ‘abandoned’, £320K Faculty refurbishment of Laigh Hall.
And Scotland's criminal justice system is so tipped against the rights of victims and accused - as the legal eagles waft in and out of jobs, earlier this week - Wolffe's replacement as Dean at the Faculty of Advocates - Gordon Jackson QC - a leading lawyer who has rightly represented some of Scotland's most hardened criminals and gangsters - lectured the Lord Advocate on the creeping rights of victims in an open letter to the press.
Mr Jackson expressed his concern that the “admirable principle” of an independent prosecution service, acting in the public interest, “is being eroded in practice”. Advocates depute and junior fiscals alike, he writes, are seen as reluctant to make decisions but refer cases to their superiors, and prosecutors have admitted to him that they are not following their own judgment on what can be proved “because of the family's position” – referring to the now common practice of meeting victims' families.
So now you know the views of the legal profession – picture the following - for it could, or may have already happened to you.
Your loved one has been brutally, mercilessly murdered by a criminal – a criminal perhaps not unknown to the authorities.
Or a victim of crime or has fallen to an untimely end at the hands of deceitful public servants or an unscrupulous business more interested in profits than the safety of their workforce.
Now - right in front of you- you face someone from the very same Crown Office talking at you - not to you - or with you
As you may begin to observe – they ask you questions – often the wrong questions - depending on their scheming ahead to figure out if they can secure a conviction or a grubby plea deal spun out by their public relations department as a win for justice. They may even tell you something in a meeting, face to face, then lie about it later. A big fat lie of a lie. No matter. The Lord Advocate will cover it up.
They claim they are going to put away the killer, the murderer, the fraudster, the crook who ruined your life, wiped someone’s very existence from life - yet you just know - that same Crown Office career monger has liar written all over their face. Unmissable, isn’t it – like a house on fire.
You’ll know it was all true - when the killer, crook or villain gets seven years and out in two.
Are you a victim of crime? Are you a victim of a miscarriage of justice? Are you a solicitor performing the testy task of representing accused persons against a prosecution service gone mad?
All of you have an interest in making your voice heard to this inquiry. Don’t leave it to vested interests, or the legal profession or those who cloak themselves in good deeds while concealing crime.
Make your voice heard – in writing – to the Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee by 19 October 2016.
Those submitting are invited to restrict their submission, if at all possible, to the equivalent of approximately four sides of A4. Evidence should be submitted in electronic (preferably MS Word) format by email to justicecommittee@parliament.scot
Organisations and individuals who do not have access to a PC and the internet may submit a hard copy to: Clerk to the Justice Committee The Scottish Parliament Edinburgh EH991SP
For further information on this inquiry please contact the committee clerks by email at justicecommittee@parliament.scot or by phone at 0131 348 6241.
MSPs TO INVESTIGATE CROWN OFFICE:
The Scottish Parliament Justice Committee has agreed to hold its first major inquiry of this session into the role and purpose of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS), with this remit:
The COPFS is Scotland’s independent prosecution service, acting in the public interest to help bring offenders to justice.
The core role of the COPFS is to consider reports about crime from the police and other agencies, to decide whether it is in the public interest to prosecute them, and, if so, to deploy the resources that are necessary to help ensure that justice is done.
The Committee’s inquiry will focus on this core role, examining in particular—
The Scottish Parliament Justice Committee has agreed to hold its first major inquiry of this session into the role and purpose of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS), with this remit:
"The COPFS is Scotland's independent prosecution service, acting in the public interest to help bring offenders to justice. The core role of the COPFS is to consider reports about crime from the police and other agencies, to decide whether it is in the public interest to prosecute them, and, if so, to deploy the resources that are necessary to help ensure that justice is done. The Committee's inquiry will focus on this core role, examining in particular—
• The effectiveness and efficiency of the COPFS, and how well it works with other stakeholders in the criminal justice system;
• Whether the COPFS has the resources and skillsets it needs to carry out its core role;
• The COPFS's responsiveness to new challenges and opportunities including the evolving nature of crime in 21st century Scotland, advances in technology, and changes in the delivery of court services that may affect access to justice;
• How the COPFS protects and supports witnesses and victims of crime.
The Committee will also take evidence on the role and function of the Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland. (The IPS is the independent inspectorate for the COPFS.)
The inquiry will not consider the COPFS's two other roles of establishing the cause of sudden, unexplained or suspicious deaths or investigating allegations of criminal conduct against police officers, except in relation to the general issue of whether the COPFS has the resources it needs to carry out its purpose."
Questions to consider:
Organisations and individuals are invited to submit written views to the Committee in relation to the inquiry. Those submitting views should feel free to address issues raised in the remit in whatever manner they prefer, but it would be particularly appreciated if they could aim to address some or all of the questions set out below, providing specific examples, data or other evidence to back up their views whenever possible—
1. Please outline your views on the overall efficiency and effectiveness of the COPFS in its core role of considering reports about crime from the police and bringing prosecutions. Are there ways in which the services provided by the COPFS could be improved - for instance, through increased use of technology, further reforms to criminal procedure, or better case management? If so, do those changes also bring risks, in terms of the overall interests of justice or of access to justice (bearing in minds the differing needs of people across Scotland; urban and rural communities, economically disadvantaged people, vulnerable groups, etc)?
2. Please outline how well you consider the COPFS works with other stakeholders in the criminal justice system, so as to provide a "joined up" and complementary service that helps meet the ends of justice. Other stakeholders might, for instance, include the police, defence lawyers, the courts, the prison service, criminal justice social work, and third party organisations working with victims or offenders.
3. Does the COPFS as presently constituted have the resources and skillsets it needs to carry out its core role effectively? And is it appropriately "future-proofed" - for instance to deal with new technologies available to criminals, changes in the overall profile of crime in 21st century Scotland, or withdrawal from the European Union? If not, what additional capacities does the COPFS need?
4. How well does the COPFS respond to the needs of victims of crimes and to witnesses (especially vulnerable witnesses) in criminal cases and meet its legal obligations towards them?
5. The Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland is the independent, statutory inspectorate for the COPFS. What is your awareness of the existence and role of the IPS and of its effectiveness in carrying out that role? How effective has it been in carrying out its role? Does it appear to have the resources it needs?
Committee convener Margaret Mitchell MSP commented: “The Crown Office & Procurator Fiscal Service is absolutely fundamental to the operation of an effective justice system in Scotland. This is why this committee has chosen to make it the focus of its first major inquiry.
“MSPs on the previous Justice Committee raised several concerns about the additional pressures that the organisation faced in recent times – including an increase in complex historic sex abuse and domestic abuse cases and new requirements required by legislation.
“The COPFS’s responsibilities towards victims and witnesses have also been increasing – and rightly. This has all taken place against a backdrop of tight budgetary settlements in recent years.
“It is likely these significant pressures will continue, so fundamental to this inquiry will be to determine if the COPFS has the resources it needs to bring offenders to justice, and is 'future proofed' to deal with new challenges.”
If you feel the Scottish Parliament should be asking many more questions of our prosecutors, don’t forge to make your views known to your own MSP, even ask them to go along to the hearings and make your issues more aware to the Justice Committee.
For previous articles on the Crown Office, read more here: Scotland's Crown Office - in Crown detail
