Was it the CAA that brought tje prosecution in this case? AIUI in the UK, to get a prison sentence you must have broken a criminal law rather than a civil law. The charge is put before the courts by the Crown prosecution service. This would then be recorded as Crown v Mr or Mrs X and the CAA gets no say in whether or not a person is charged. 7
gallois wrote:
The charge is put before the courts by the Crown prosecution service
The Crown Prosecution Service does not have a monopoly to bring prosecutions. There are many public authorities, such as the CAA, the Office of Fair Trding, the Financial Services Agency, probably dozens of them, who are prosecuting without any CPS involvement.
Even a private individual or organisation can bring a criminal prosecution to the courts, although the CPS has the right to take over the prosecution if they wish.
Yes, but my point was “are they prosecutions which can lead to a prison sentence or equivalent”?
They are. They’re charges under criminal law that can lead to a custodial sentence.
Who is prosecuting is irrelevant.
Remember that it isn’t an inquisitorial system like in France, so the ‘authority’ doesn’t decide the outcome. The CAA is just one of two parties arguing in front of the judge and jury, and being the prosecution they will have to prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.
The authority doesn’t decide the outcome here. Judges do and ad in UK they are independent
Surelybit does make a difference whether a Government.agency like the CAA brings a prosecution or an agency independent pfnthe Government in the name.of.the Queen does
Otherwise you get a system which is.causing.such a problem today Poland and the EU, especially whrn it comes to custodial sentences.
gallois wrote:
Surelybit does make a difference whether a Government.agency like the CAA brings a prosecution or an agency independent pfnthe Government in the name.of.the Queen does
Not really. Whoever prosecutes needs to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. If they can do that, they win; if they don’t, they lose. The only practical difference is that the Crown Prosecution Service in the UK has two “tests” to apply (reasonable chance of conviction, and there is a public interest in prosecution), while others can bring flimsier cases to court.
gallois wrote:
The authority doesn’t decide the outcome here. Judges do and ad in UK they are independent
The CAA also doesn’t decide the outcome here. They can take extra-judicial measure – e.g., licence suspension for “safety” reasons, but they can’t convict you of a crime, the court does that.
Lower level offences get tried in the magistrate’s court. Here, prosecution and defence both argue their case, and the magistrates (a bench of three lay judges, guided in law by a legal adviser) or a Judge then decide both guilt and sentence.
Higher level offences end up in crown court, where guilt gets decided by a jury, and the judge then decides the sentence.
In both cases, the CAA would have to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. It makes no practical difference if the CPS or the CAA do the proving and arguing.
But in this case wasn’t a custodial sentence handed down. And as you said if it had been a CAA prosecution there could not have been a custodial sentence passed down.
gallois wrote:
But in this case wasn’t a custodial sentence handed down. And as you said if it had been a CAA prosecution there could not have been a custodial sentence passed down.
Yes there was a custodial sentence handed down.
Yes the CAA was the prosecutor.
I don’t think he said that. What sentences are able to be handed down depends on the nature of the offence and the sentencing guidelines/requirements for that specific charge. Who happens to be prosecuting (CPS / CAA / other govt body / private prosecution) is completely irrelevant to the sentencing.
Another day of learning things.🙂
At the more extreme end of the scale – a man was convicted of rape and jailed for 14 years after a private prosecution was brought by a Women’s organisation. The CPS refused to prosecute
(paywall, but you can read the headline and first paragraph)
A private prosecution does not mean you have a private individual arguing in court – it involves professional lawyers preparing and arguing the case, it just happens that they are not instructed (and paid) by the CPS. For anything likely to involve > 6 months imprisonment, it will be in a crown court in front of a jury.
