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 constituency
tabling member printed
uin
answer	is ministerial correction true false date of answer exactly: or between: and answer text answering member constituency answering member printed question first answered answering member label attachment file name title
tabling member	label

Search

91227

registered interest
date	09/09/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Homicide
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 1 September 2014, Official Report, column 32W, on Crown Courts, what the reasons were for the (a) Crown Prosecution Service offering no evidence and (b) judge ordering acquittals in each of the cases in the homicide category.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	208789
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 13/10/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) case outcome records include an allocation of a reason for cases not resulting in a conviction, including the numbers where the judge ordered an acquittal. Judge ordered acquittals comprise cases discontinued, where no evidence was offered, the indictment was stayed or all charges were left to lie on file.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Further to the Answer provided on 1 September 2014, published in Hansard, Official Report, column 32W, on Crown Courts, the number of defendants, by reason, in the ‘Homicide’ category with an outcome of ‘Offer no Evidence’ or ‘Judge Ordered Acquittal’, during 2013-14 is shown in the attached table. The data represent case outcomes recorded by the 13 regional Areas of the Crown Prosecution Service</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 13/10/2014 14:40:55 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

91228

registered interest
date	09/09/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Homicide
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 16 July 2014, Official Report, column 678W, on Crown Courts, how many defendants included in the figures for each of the years from 2008 to 2013 were charged with homicide.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	208790
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 13/10/2014 answer text <p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains a central record of prosecution outcomes with reference to 12 Principal Offence Categories which indicate the most serious offence a defendant is charged with at finalisation, in the CPS Case Management Information System.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The Principal Offence Category comprises a range of individual offences. These cannot be disaggregated to report prosecution outcomes by a specific offence.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Further to the Answer provided on 16 July 2014, published in Hansard, Official Report, column 678W, on Crown Courts, the number of defendants allocated a Principal Offence Category of ‘Homicide’ in each of the last six years, is shown in the attached table.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 13/10/2014 14:34:41 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland attachment 1 file name Table PQ 208790.docx title Table: Homicide - PQ 208790
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

90941

registered interest
date	08/09/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Bail: Appeals
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many (a) successful and (b) unsuccessful appeals against bail were made by prosecutors in Crown courts since 3 December 2012.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	208542
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 11/09/2014 answer text <p> </p><p>The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) maintains no central record of the number or outcomes of appeals against bail conducted by the CPS in Crown courts. This information could only be obtained by examining all prosecution files maintained during the requested period, which would incur disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency South Swindon answering member printed Mr Robert Buckland question first answered 11/09/2014 12:51:28 answering member 4106 label Biography information for Sir Robert Buckland
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

78781

registered interest
date	17/07/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Crown Court
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, pursuant to the Answer of 16 July 2014, Official Report, column 678W, on Crown courts, what the number of defendants was in each category for each type of offence in 2013-14.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	206588
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 01/09/2014 answer text <p>Further to the Answer provided on 16 July 2014, the number of defendants in each category for each type of offence in 2013-14 is shown in the table below:</p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td> </td><td><p>(i)</p><p>Offer no evidence <strong>(</strong><strong>1</strong><strong>)</strong></p></td><td><p>(ii)</p><p>Judge ordered acquittal</p></td><td><p>(iii)</p><p>Judge directed acquittal</p></td><td><p>(iv)</p><p>Acquittal after trial</p></td><td><p>Total Prosecuted</p></td></tr><tr><td> </td><td><p>Number</p></td><td><p>Number</p></td><td><p>Number</p></td><td><p>Number</p></td><td> </td></tr><tr><td><p>A Homicide</p></td><td><p>26</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>10</p></td><td><p>125</p></td><td><p><strong>910</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>B Offences Against</p><p>The Person</p></td><td><p>2,322</p></td><td><p>3,048</p></td><td><p>176</p></td><td><p>1,633</p></td><td><p><strong>21,223</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>C Sexual Offences</p></td><td><p>663</p></td><td><p>870</p></td><td><p>72</p></td><td><p>1,685</p></td><td><p><strong>8,755</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>D Burglary</p></td><td><p>806</p></td><td><p>1,192</p></td><td><p>48</p></td><td><p>278</p></td><td><p><strong>11,471</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>E Robbery</p></td><td><p>716</p></td><td><p>943</p></td><td><p>65</p></td><td><p>307</p></td><td><p><strong>6,810</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>F Theft And Handling</p></td><td><p>619</p></td><td><p>913</p></td><td><p>52</p></td><td><p>239</p></td><td><p><strong>6,854</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>G Fraud And Forgery</p></td><td><p>371</p></td><td><p>498</p></td><td><p>37</p></td><td><p>238</p></td><td><p><strong>5,433</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>H Criminal Damage</p></td><td><p>70</p></td><td><p>114</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>25</p></td><td><p><strong>1,160</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>I Drugs Offences</p></td><td><p>565</p></td><td><p>823</p></td><td><p>32</p></td><td><p>307</p></td><td><p><strong>15,567</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>J Public Order Offences</p></td><td><p>438</p></td><td><p>628</p></td><td><p>24</p></td><td><p>233</p></td><td><p><strong>5,164</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>K All Other Offences</p><p>(excluding Motoring)</p></td><td><p>586</p></td><td><p>835</p></td><td><p>40</p></td><td><p>265</p></td><td><p><strong>5,895</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>L Motoring Offences</p></td><td><p>109</p></td><td><p>148</p></td><td><p>15</p></td><td><p>69</p></td><td><p><strong>2,233</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong><em>TOTAL Principal </em></strong></p><p><strong><em>Offence Categories</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>7,291</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>10,049</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>575</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>5,404</em></strong></p></td><td><p><strong><em>91,475</em></strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Principal Offence</p><p>Category Not Allocated</p></td><td><p>504</p></td><td><p>665</p></td><td><p>45</p></td><td><p>180</p></td><td><p><strong>1,971</strong></p></td></tr><tr><td><p><strong>TOTAL</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>7,795</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>10,714</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>620</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>5,584</strong></p></td><td><p><strong>93,446</strong></p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p>Data Source: CPS Case Management Information System</p><p>Offered no evidence is a subset of Judge ordered acquittals.</p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 01/09/2014 14:21:03 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

76235

registered interest
date	08/07/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Chris Huhne and Vicky Pryce
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, what costs his Department has incurred in prosecuting the case of (a) Christopher Huhne and (b) Vasiliki Pryce.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	204655
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/07/2014 answer text <p>The total cost the CPS incurred in prosecuting the case was £150,710.88. The cost incurred in relation to each defendant individually is not available, as some of the costs were recorded for both defendants collectively.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency Kenilworth and Southam answering member printed Jeremy Wright question first answered 16/07/2014 15:25:44 answering member 1560 label Biography information for Sir Jeremy Wright
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

60998

registered interest
date	10/06/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Sentencing: Appeals
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many cases of unduly lenient sentences were (a) referred to his Department, (b) taken up by him and (c) upheld in court since 2010 where the offender whose sentence was the subject of the appeal could have been released prior to the conclusion of the case if there had been a delay in the commencement of proceedings by (i) 14 days, (ii) 28 days, (iii) 42 days and (iv) 62 days; and if he will make a statement.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	200137
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/06/2014 answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The information requested is contained in the following table.</p><table><tbody><tr><td><p>Year</p></td><td><p>Offenders whose sentences</p><p>were referred to the AGO</p></td><td><p>Number of offenders whose sentences</p><p>were referred by the Law Officers</p><p>to the Court of Appeal</p></td><td><p>Cases</p><p>Withdrawn</p></td><td><p>Sentences</p><p>Increased</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2010</p></td><td><p>342</p></td><td><p>90</p></td><td><p>13</p></td><td><p>60</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2011</p></td><td><p>377</p></td><td><p>121</p></td><td><p>4</p></td><td><p>94</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2012</p></td><td><p>435</p></td><td><p>88</p></td><td><p>6</p></td><td><p>62</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2013</p></td><td><p>498</p></td><td><p>79</p></td><td><p>9</p></td><td><p>61</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>2014 up to 11 June 2014</p></td><td><p>247</p></td><td><p>44</p></td><td><p>2</p></td><td><p>16*</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>* out of a total of 21 sentences considered by the Court of Appeal up to 11 June 2014</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>My office does not hold information on the release date of offenders that have been referred to the Court of Appeal.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Hertfordshire answering member printed Oliver Heald question first answered 16/06/2014 16:39:11 answering member 69 label Biography information for Sir Oliver Heald
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

60999

registered interest
date	10/06/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
hansard heading	Sentencing: Appeals
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many times an appeal made against an unduly lenient sentence in the last five years has led to someone being returned to prison who had already been released.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	200138
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 16/06/2014 answer text <p>This information is not collated centrally and obtaining it would require my office to manually consider each file over the last 5 years which would involve a disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Hertfordshire answering member printed Oliver Heald question first answered 16/06/2014 15:55:35 answering member 69 label Biography information for Sir Oliver Heald
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

49746

registered interest
date	06/05/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, how many (a) men and (b) women have been (i) investigated, (ii) given an administrative penalty, (iii) given a caution and (iv) convicted in court for benefit fraud since the prosecution of such cases was transferred to the Law Officers' Department.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	197836
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 13/05/2014 answer text <p>Allegations of benefit fraud are investigated by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP). Administrative penalties are financial penalties, which can be offered as an alternative to prosecution, where there has been no previous fraud penalty of any form. These are issued by the DWP and Local Authorities. Cautions are issued by the Police.</p><p>The records held by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) identify the number of offences in which a prosecution commenced and, reached a first hearing in magistrates' courts, rather than the number of defendants prosecuted and convicted or their gender.</p><p>No central records of the prosecution outcomes of offences are held by the CPS. To obtain details of the number of people prosecuted for and convicted of offences of benefit fraud, which can be charged under various sections of the Social Security Administration Act 1992, Section 35 of the Tax Credits Act 2002 or the Fraud Act 2006, including their gender, would require a manual exercise of reviewing individual case files to be undertaken at a disproportionate cost.</p><p>Furthermore, cases of benefit fraud are also prosecuted by Local Authorities so any data the CPS can glean from a manual exercise would not provide a complete record.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Hertfordshire answering member printed Oliver Heald question first answered 13/05/2014 12:00:00 answering member 69 label Biography information for Sir Oliver Heald
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies

46162

registered interest
date	01/04/2014
answering body	Attorney General
answering dept id	88
answering dept short name	Attorney General
answering dept sort name	Attorney General
house id	1
legislature	25259 pref label House of Commons
question text	To ask the Attorney General, what assessment he has made of the (a) positive and (b) negative effects of serving a witness summons on a complainant in a court case involving alleged domestic violence.
tabling member constituency	Shipley
tabling member printed	Philip Davies
uin	194675
answer	answer is ministerial correction date of answer 08/04/2014 answer text <p>I have made no formal appraisal, but Crown prosecution Service (CPS) guidance to prosecutors sets out the circumstances in which witness summonses can best be used in such cases. This guidance is published on the CPS website at: <a href="http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/domestic_violence_aide-memoire/#a25" target="_blank">http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/d_to_g/domestic_violence_aide-memoire/#a25</a></p><p>Witness summonses can be effective in ensuring complainants attend court when they would not otherwise do so. They can also support victims who are concerned about how a voluntary decision to attend court might be perceived by ‘removing' the pressure of making that decision for them. Where a victim attends as a result of a witness summons, there is often a guilty plea.</p><p>However, it is also possible that a witness will still not attend, or may come to court but refuse to give evidence.</p><p> </p> answering member constituency North East Hertfordshire answering member printed Oliver Heald question first answered 08/04/2014 12:00:00 answering member 69 label Biography information for Sir Oliver Heald
tabling member	1565 label Biography information for Sir Philip Davies