| 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>
|
|
