<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Fitted-In &#187; Keith Hyatt</title>
	<atom:link href="https://fittedin.org/fittedin/?feed=rss2&#038;tag=keith-hyatt" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://fittedin.org/fittedin</link>
	<description>The quest for justice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2019 11:59:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.38</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Unaccountable</title>
		<link>https://fittedin.org/fittedin/?p=745</link>
		<comments>https://fittedin.org/fittedin/?p=745#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2014 00:48:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Satish Sekar]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Unfit for Purpose]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Baron (James) Wallace of Tankerness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Baron John Laird]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Barri White]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Code for Crown Prosecutors]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[CPS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Her Majestyʼs Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HMCPSI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Keith Hyatt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prosecutorial misconduct]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Rachel Manning]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shahidul Ahmed]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[THE CARDIFF FIVE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[THE LYNETTE WHITE INQUIRY]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[vindication]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://fittedin.org/fittedin/?p=745</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[by Satish Sekar © Satish Sekar (July 21st 2013) Unjustifiable The Crown Prosecution Service was established over a quarter of a century ago. Among its high profile and spectacular failures is the Lynette White Inquiry. Its Code for Crown Prosecutors...<br /><a class="read-more-button" href="https://fittedin.org/fittedin/?p=745">Read more</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY">by Satish Sekar <span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">© Satish Sekar (July 21</span><sup><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;">st</span></sup><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"> 2013)</span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Unjustifiable</b></span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The Crown Prosecution Service was established over a quarter of a century ago. Among its high profile and spectacular failures is the Lynette White Inquiry. Its Code for Crown Prosecutors included criteria on sufficiency of evidence. When the Cardiff Five were prosecuted it had 13 – the overwhelming majority of them strongly suggested that it was a case that should never have been brought to trial.</span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The CPS has been avoiding taking responsibility for its numerous failures in this case for several years now. They even had the effrontery to claim that securing convictions justified the decision to prosecute. Since when has securing one of the most notorious miscarriages of justice in British history been a justification? </span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Excuses </b></span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">When that was pointed out to it, they hid behind the recent proceedings against the former police officers, claiming that they could not answer the questions then. But they promised answers after the trial. The collapse of the trial was followed by pledges to respond that were quickly broken. The new excuse was that they would respond after HMCPSI reported, even though the concerns we raised were not part of that investigation and they knew that full well.</span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY">“<span style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">The role of Her Majestyʼs Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) is to enhance the quality of justice through independent inspection and assessment of prosecution services and, in doing so, improve their effectiveness and efficiency”, Baron (James) Wallace of Tankerness responded in writing to Baron (John) Laird.</span></span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="color: #222222;">“<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">Although HMCPSI examines a range of cases as part of its normal inspection process, it does not investigate and report on individual cases unless, exceptionally, a case is referred to HMCPSI by the Attorney-General using statutory powers for matters intended for cases of general public concern” Lord Wallace continued.</span></span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: large;"><b>Inadequate</b></span></span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="color: #222222;"><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">This plainly was a case of great public concern, but so were many others. There are now six vindication cases in England and Wales<a class="sdfootnoteanc" href="#sdfootnote1sym" name="sdfootnote1anc"><sup>1</sup></a>. Many of them raise issues over the original prosecutions. The CPS has yet to be held accountable over any of them. HMCPSI has not been asked to investigate those or others too where prosecutorial misconduct or incompetence may have occurred.</span></span></span></p>
<p class="western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><span style="color: #222222;">“<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;">However, as a rule HMCPSI is not an investigative body”, Wallace continued. “HMCPSI has undertaken two recent reviews at the request of the Law Officers”. The HMCPSI report allowed the CPS to evade responsibility for its numerous failures over this case. The CPS has never explained its dismal performance in the Lynette White Inquiry. It should not be allowed to evade its responsibility to the public.</span></span></span></p>
<div id="sdfootnote1">
<p class="sdfootnote-western" style="text-align: justify;" align="JUSTIFY"><a class="sdfootnotesym" href="#sdfootnote1anc" name="sdfootnote1sym">1</a> Since this article was written a seventh vindication case has occurred. On September 4<sup>th</sup> 2013 Shahidul Ahmed was convicted of the murder of Rachel Manning, vindicating Barri White and Keith Hyatt: the author.</p>
</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://fittedin.org/fittedin/?feed=rss2&#038;p=745</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
