Christopher Grayling MP

Ministry of Justice
102 Petty France
London, SW1H 9AJ



3
rd
July 2014

Dear Sir

Re: An open letter regarding the lack of diaries within the Crown Prosecution Service

I anticipate that whenever you receive a letter from a criminal defence lawyer, you expect a vitriolic
attack on the cutbacks and changes proposed within the criminal justice system. I am indeed a
criminal defence lawyer who is deeply concerned with the deterioration within the system, but have
no intention of repeating in this letter the countless arguments you will no doubt already be aware
of.

I write to ask whether you have considered a back to basics plan? A simple, cheap, effective change
to the areas of the system that actually cause the expensive waste and delays on a day to day basis;
and contribute significantly, albeit indirectly, to the Criminal Defence budget. Criminal defence
lawyers are all aware of the fancy plans that sound good to the electorate and politicians.
Numerous proposals and changes have occurred over the years which really sound as though
progress is being made. In reality they are little more than sound bites.

A small sample of the examples of proposals to reform and re-energise the criminal justice system
at a national and local level to reconnect with victims and local communities (MOJ words not mine)
have included:

a) Abolishing unnecessary committal hearings for 'either-way' crimes to help save thousands of
hours of court time each year. In reality the Magistrates Court committal hearings were a
paper exercise that rarely took more than a few minutes, and took less time than the Crown
Court Preliminary hearings that have replaced them, and achieve little more.

b) Saving police time by using live video links so that officers can give evidence from their local
police station rather than waiting at court. In reality many of the Magistrates Courts do not
have live video links so this could never happen, and even those that do have the facilities, I
have never seen this actually done.

c) Publishing justice outcomes and police actions on the national crime mapping website, so
that people can see what happens next after crimes are committed on their streets. In reality
most people are entirely unaware of this website, I would be interested to know how much
this cost to implement, how much to run, how many hits it gets a months, and if you
consider there is any cost benefit in this project.

d) Streamlining the processing of criminal cases, in particular by increased use of digital
technology across the criminal justice agencies. In reality, the digital technology is not saving
time within the court system, as prosecutors struggle to operate the equipment, cannot
hand up copies of key documents from their electronic file causing delays whilst they are
printed, and problems such as no access to key correspondence and pagination on computer
systems not being available means pages cannot be easily found.

We have all heard about how this digital technology will enable criminal justice agencies to create
and manage case files more efficiently, the Police and Crown Prosecution Service to transfer
information electronically with each other and with the courts and probation services, and parties in
court to work from a laptop or other portable computer in court instead of using the paper file.

I would however like you to have sight of a letter that I received today from a Crown Prosecution
Service in the Midlands. I have attached a copy to this letter; although as this is an open letter I have
redacted the open copy to save embarrassment to those lawyers concerned, and to ensure
confidentiality to the complainant and the defendant. The letter gives a three part explanation of
the failure to comply with directions from the Magistrates Court. Please note that this case is a new
style digital file, and the prosecutor at court has been working from a laptop without any paperwork.

The case was listed for trial in early June. I received disclosure from the Crown 48 hours before the
trial some four weeks after disclosure should have been served, a failure to comply with standard
directions. I did not however receive full disclosure. The unused material was served 24 hours
before trial. I still did not receive all the paperwork required under the Criminal Procedure and
Investigations Act. The trial was vacated as the court accepted a series of failings by the Crown.

Four defence witnesses and a complainant had a wasted trip to court. As did an agent prosecutor,
three magistrates, a Court Clerk, Usher and myself.

To prevent further problems directions were made by the Court. The deadline came, and passed.
These were not complied with. Four weeks after the initial trial date, the Crown has still not
complied with the directions.

As you will see from the letter, video links, digital files, and fancy websites have not helped in this
case. The taxpayer has already incurred over 1,000 costs to the criminal defence budget alone, as a
direct result of the failings by the CPS. These costs continue to mount. And this is just one case out
of thousands dealt with by that CPS area.

So what was the main reason for the failure to comply with the directions and for the wasted time
and cost to the criminal defence budget?

The Crown Prosecution Service does not have a diary.

They are unable to make a note of directions. There is no capability of ensuring any compliance with
Court directions as they cannot make a note of them so they can be actioned. I wonder what would
have happened had I not been proactive in chasing the CPS?

In my opinion, the system is doomed to failure regardless of all the fancy information technology
being used. I would respectfully suggest that until the basics have been put right, the complex plans
for streamlining are completely and utterly pointless.

Whilst the other explanations such as shortage of staff and computer failures are in some way
understandable (but clearly side issues), the failure of the Crown to purchase a diary, either paper or
electronic, to make a note of court directions, is entirely unforgiveable. I wonder how Her Majestys
Court and Tribunals Service can ever have faith that any direction given to an advocate will ever be
complied with when no one at the Crown Prosecution Service has anything to diary the direction in?

I would be grateful for you confirming that you plan to investigate this fully and advise me that this
basic and easily rectifiable issue will be resolved. It surely cannot cost much to buy a diary for the
CPS office involved?

Defence lawyers who work in and out of the courts on a daily basis are in a prime position to advise
you of the real reasons why money is wasted and where major savings could be made. Perhaps you
could diary a frontline defence lawyer in sometime, for a chat?

If you have a diary, of course.

Yours faithfully


Paul Tubb

Enc.

Redacted Copy of Letter (open)
Copy of Letter (restricted)