Editing Crown Prosecution Service (section)

==History==
Historically prosecutions were conducted through a patchwork of different systems. For serious crimes tried at the county level, justices of the peace or the sheriff would issue a presentment to a [[grand jury]], who would either return a "true bill" resulting in an indictment, or not. If a true bill followed presentment, the individual would be tried by a [[petit jury]] by justices of the [[Court of King's Bench (England)|King's Bench]], [[Common Pleas]] or [[Exchequer]] as they toured the circuits conducting the [[assizes]]. Individuals could be prosecuted upon indictment by prosecutors ranging from the [[Attorney-general]] or [[Solicitor-general]], king's serjeants or attorneys, prosecutors instructed by the sheriff or justice of the peace. It was more likely that the Attorney-General or Solicitor-General would be involved in prosecutions of serious crimes such as high treason at the [[Court of King's Bench (England)| Court of King's Bench]] at [[Westminster Hall]].

The second means of prosecution was by "appeal", which was when the prosecution was initiated not by presentment to a grand jury but by direct private prosecution of an interested party. An "appeal of murder" prosecuted by the widow of a murdered man was typical of this form of prosecution.

Sir [[John Maule (barrister)|John Maule]] was appointed to be the first [[Director of Public Prosecutions (England and Wales)|Director of Public Prosecutions for England and Wales]] in 1880, operating under the [[Home Office]]; his jurisdiction was only for decisions as to whether to prosecute in a very small number of difficult or important cases; once prosecution had been authorised, the matter was turned over to the [[Government Legal Department|Treasury Solicitor]]. Police forces continued to be responsible for the bulk of cases, sometimes referring difficult ones to the Director.{{r|NationalArchive}}

In 1962 a [[Royal commission]] recommended that police forces set up independent prosecution teams so as to avoid having the same officers investigate and prosecute a case. Technical barriers were already in place that those prosecuting did so as private citizens, rendering them open to the range of evidential offences imposable by the court. This Royal Commission's recommendation was not implemented by all police forces, however, and so in 1977, another was set up, this time headed by Sir [[Cyril Philips]]. It reported in 1981, recommending that a single unified team, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), be made responsible for all public prosecutions in England and Wales. The example of the Procurator Fiscal system in Scotland was influential in encouraging this recommendation. A [[White paper]] was released in 1983, becoming the [[Prosecution of Offences Act 1985]], which established the CPS under the direction of the Director of Public Prosecutions, consisting of a merger of his old department with the police prosecution departments. It became operational on 1 October 1986.<ref>{{cite web |title=Crown Prosecution Service - Annual Report 1986 - 87 |url=https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a7b8c1640f0b645ba3c506e/0014.pdf |website=[[GOV.UK]] |access-date=9 December 2024}}</ref>

In 1997, the Home Office tasked Sir [[Iain Glidewell]] to inquire into performance of and make recommendations for the CPS. The Glidewell Report of June 1998 found that 12% of charges by police were discontinued by the CPS and that there were failures to communicate between the two. It recommended the CPS:
*focus resources more on serious crimes at the Crown Court level
*co-operate more with the police in each case
*concurring with an existing government plan, restructure the organisation into 42 regional branches, each with own Chief Crown Prosecutor.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/259808/3972.pdf|title=The Review of the Crown Prosecution Service|year=1998|publisher=GOV.UK}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/104006.stm|title=Prosecution service shake-up|work=BBC News|date=June 1, 1998}}</ref><ref name="Huxley-BinnsMartin2014">{{cite book|author1=Rebecca Huxley-Binns|author2=Jacqueline Martin|title=Unlocking the English Legal System|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=u6PIAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT188|date=10 February 2014|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-1-4441-7424-3|page=188}}</ref><ref name="Brain2010">{{cite book|author=Timothy Brain|title=A History of Policing in England and Wales from 1974: A Turbulent Journey|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=lV75WQRIfxYC&pg=PA283|date=18 March 2010|publisher=OUP Oxford|isbn=978-0-19-921866-0|page=283}}</ref>

===Employment tribunal claim===
[[Rebecca Lawrence]], who was the chief executive of the CPS from 2019 to 2023, brought a claim against the organisation for age and sex discrimination. This was settled after the first day of the tribunal in November 2023. Lawrence then announced that she was leaving the organisation, saying this was a "natural transition point for the CPS".<ref>{{cite web |last1=Castro |first1=Bianca |title=CPS and chief executive settle discrimination claim hours before tribunal hearing|date=17 November 2023 |url=https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/cps-and-chief-executive-settle-discrimination-claim/5117937.article |website=lawgazette.co.uk |publisher=Law Society Gazette |access-date=30 November 2023}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Castro |first1=Bianca |title=Crown Prosecution Service's chief executive steps down|date=17 November 2023 |url=https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/news/cps-chief-executive-steps-down-following-tribunal-settlement/5117942.article |website=lawgazette.co.uk |publisher=Law Society Gazette |access-date=30 November 2023}}</ref>