---

Crime: Rape

Answer

The decisions in relation to disclosure were not in accordance with the existing guidance or, indeed, the spirit of the CPIA. The previous convictions for offences of dishonesty, and other material going to the reliability of the complainant’s evidence, should have been disclosed, although whether it was actually deployed at trial would have been a matter for the defence. The Criminal Procedure and Investigations Act 1996 (CPIA) was in force at the time of this investigation and the subsequent proceedings. It then required the prosecution to make primary disclosure to the accused of any material that, in the prosecutor's opinion, might undermine the prosecution case. This test was subjective and based on the opinion of the individual Crown prosecutor, but it was supplemented by guidance for police officers and prosecutors. The guidance gave examples of potentially undermining material, including previous convictions or cautions of a witness, any other information that cast doubt on the reliability of a witness, or evidence of a motivation for making false allegations. The guidance stressed that previous convictions for offences of dishonesty would normally be relevant to a witness’ credibility and should therefore be disclosed. On 8 September 1999 (Warren Blackwell was convicted on 7 October 1999, a month later), a special CPS policy circular stipulated that all previous convictions of prosecution witnesses had to be disclosed to the accused, save for those relating to minor road traffic matters, regardless of their age or whether they were spent.

Secondary information

Type

Written question

Reference

131; 687 c42-3WA

Session

2006-07

Subjects

Disclosure of information Crown Prosecution Service Evidence of previous convictions Rape Perjury Trials Rights of accused Blackwell, Warren

Link

View this Written question on www.publications.parliament.uk