Commentary
| Published date | 01 November 2002 |
| Date | 01 November 2002 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/0032258X0207500401 |
| Subject Matter | Commentary |
The
Police
Journal
COMMENTARY
Among a raft
of
recommendations set out in a recent White
Paper, which preceded the Queen's Speech in November, ambi-
tious plans to create a joined-up case-management system were
outlined by the UK Home Office. The concern in this regard is
that each
of
those primary organisations comprising the UK
criminal system (police, crown prosecution service, courts and
judiciary, prison and probation services) operated independent
administration systems leading to inefficiency, duplication and
potential delays to prosecution cases. As set out in the White
Paper:
where the system is not sufficiently joined up, case manage-
ment is less efficient than it ought to be.
If
information is not
up to date and accessible, it can lead to inappropriate
decisions about charges and bail. Performance is not meas-
ured well enough and accountability is insufficiently clear.
Other concerns, relating to case management, outlined in the
White Paper include:
• Each of the agencies described above use different
methods for referencing defendants, offenders, charges
and cases. Cross-referencing is at best difficult at worst
impossible;
•Prosecution files were found to be incomplete or incon-
sistent, often resulting in adjournment, attrition or unjusti-
fied acquittal;
•Delays were experienced in disseminating and recording
the results
of
court hearings, leading to a delay in updating
criminal records which in turn could have an impact on
other court hearings.
At face value the way forward outlined in the document is both
ambitious and impressive and includes:
The Police Journal. Volume 75 (2002) 285
To continue reading
Request your trial