Show Search Form

Search Results

registered interest	true false
date	exactly: or between: and
answering body
answering dept id
answering dept short name
answering dept sort name
hansard heading
house id
legislature	pref label
question text
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member printed question first answered answering member label
tabling member	label

Search

178345

registered interest
date	06/02/2015
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Hunting: Prosecutions
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any plans to investigate the basis on which the Crown Prosecution Service brought forward a prosecution against Terrence Potter and Paul Whitehead of the Lunesdale Hunt.
tabling member printed	Lord Blencathra
uin	HL4733
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>There is no plan to investigate the basis upon which this prosecution was brought.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The prosecution was brought following an investigation by North Yorkshire Police into the alleged commission of a wildlife crime. The two defendants were originally charged by the police to appear in Court on 5 September 2014. The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) subsequently undertook a review of the case, in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, and determined, firstly, that there was a realistic prospect of conviction and, secondly, that it was in the public interest to prosecute.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>As the allegations were denied, the case was listed for trial before York Magistrates’ Court on 21 January 2015. On the day of trial, two key prosecution witnesses who produced video evidence of the offence were unavailable to attend court. The CPS had previously made an application to adjourn and reschedule the trial. Due to an administrative failing this application was made very close to the trial date and it was refused by the court. The trial then took place in the absence of these two witnesses and without their evidence being heard. The Court found no case to answer against each defendant.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Tankerness question first answered 19/02/2015 09:34:31 answering member 630 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Tankerness
tabling member	497 label Biography information for Lord Blencathra

178346

registered interest
date	06/02/2015
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Hunting: Prosecutions
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government what scrutiny the Crown Prosecution Service makes of any evidence presented to them by the League Against Cruel Sports alleging breaches of the Hunting Act 2004 before deciding to prosecute.
tabling member printed	Lord Blencathra
uin	HL4734
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutes following an investigation and referral of a case by the police. If the police charge an offence under the Hunting Act 2004 without a request for advice, a crown prosecutor reviews the case following charge. Each case will be reviewed in accordance with the Full Code Test set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. Where the evidential and public interest stages of the Full Code Test are met, then the CPS will robustly prosecute.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The prosecutor must consider whether each piece of evidence is admissible, reliable and credible – this would include being satisfied that it was lawfully obtained. Evidence provided by the League against Cruel Sports would be looked at in the same way as any other evidence.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Tankerness question first answered 19/02/2015 09:35:00 answering member 630 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Tankerness
tabling member	497 label Biography information for Lord Blencathra

178347

registered interest
date	06/02/2015
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Hunting: Prosecutions
house id	2
legislature	25277 pref label House of Lords
question text	To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they have any plans to investigate the basis on which the Crown Prosecution Service brought charges against Mr Liddle of the Melbreak Hunt, charges which were then dropped.
tabling member printed	Lord Blencathra
uin	HL4735
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 19/02/2015 answer text <p>Cumbria Constabulary charged Mr Liddle with hunting a wild mammal with dogs (contrary to Sections 1 and 6 of the Hunting Act 2004) and allowing dogs to be dangerously out of control (contrary to Section 3 of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991). This followed an incident on 9 March 2014 when members of the public witnessed a fox being killed by a pack of hounds on land near Buttermere. The police were satisfied that there was sufficient evidence to charge Mr Liddle and issued a postal requisition on 6 June 2014. These offences fall within the category of offences where the charging decision rests with the police. Mr Liddle appeared at Workington Magistrates Court on 27 June 2014 and pleaded not guilty to all charges. Following receipt of all the evidential material from the police, the case was reviewed by the Crown Prosecution Service’s North West Area Wildlife Crime Lead. He applied the Code for Crown Prosecutors and determined that there was insufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction having considered all of the required elements of the offence. Following consultation with Cumbria Constabulary the case was discontinued on 10 September 2014. The Crown Prosecution Service did not, therefore, bring charges against Mr Liddle. The case was brought to an end after the full evidential material was reviewed.</p><p> </p> answering member printed Lord Wallace of Tankerness question first answered 19/02/2015 09:34:10 answering member 630 label Biography information for Lord Wallace of Tankerness
tabling member	497 label Biography information for Lord Blencathra