SUMMARY JUSTICE REFORM: UNDERTAKINGS EVALUATION
This report presents the findings from the Summary Justice Reform: Undertakings Evaluation. The research formed part of a wider package of work to evaluate Summary Justice Reform (SJR) in Scotland as a whole. The aim of the research was to evaluate how far the reforms to undertakings had met both the specific policy objectives as well as the overarching aims and objectives of SJR.
Footnotes
1. The 'complaint' is a paper document that includes the charge(s) libelled, the disclosable summary of evidence from the police report and information on the accused's previous convictions.
2. Reforms to Bail have their origins in the 2005 Bail and remand Action Plan available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2005/09/26103133/31348
3. The Summary Justice Review Committee: Report to Ministers (2004) Scottish Executive, Edinburgh available at: http://scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/03/19042/34176
4. Smarter Justice, Safer Communities: Summary Justice Reform Next Steps (2005) Scottish Executive, Edinburgh available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/37428/0009568.pdf
5. Summary Justice Reform System Model (2007) Scottish Executive, Edinburgh available at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2007/09/06092618/6
6. The 'complaint' is a paper document that includes the charge(s) libelled, the disclosable summary of evidence from the police report and information on the accused's previous convictions.
7. Although special conditions attached to an undertaking have to be made by an authorising officer of the rank of at least Inspector.
8. Data is only available for all LCJB areas (except Highlands and Islands) between December 2008 and November 2011
9. Data are not available before this date and so the period from April 2007 to March 2009 cannot be compared with the data in Figure 2.1
10. Again, data is not available prior to April 2009 regarding the number of Standard Prosecution reports submitted to COPFS and the ACPOS data prior to the reforms has several gaps since data is not recorded for all LCJB areas.
11. Totals do not add to 100% due to rounding
12. This is in the context that Central Scotland Police operate a 'no liberation to cite' policy, wherein accused coming into police custody are either kept in custody or liberated on an undertaking, the majority being with no conditions (mandatory) attached. Citation is no longer used at all.
13. The exception being Central Scotland Police where there is no option for summons, in line with their 'no liberation to cite' policy.
14. Including the policy of 'no liberation to cite' in Central Scotland Police which dictates use of undertakings or custody only.
15. This is likely to be as a result of different forces interpreting the Lord Advocate's guidelines on use of conditions differently.
16. Note: comparable data for those released for citation is not available.
17. Although the data includes continued pleading diets, the undertaking expires at the point the case calls in court and so technically the next FTA would be one of breaching bail or FTA having been ordained to appear.
18. Data is taken from the Criminal Proceedings in Scotland Statistical Bulletin see http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/12/12131605/0
19. The large jump in the numbers of convictions from April 2008 onwards may be due to changes in the way that such charges were coded following legislation in the 2007 Act.
20. Data is taken from the Criminal Proceedings in Scotland Statistical Bulletin see http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/12/12131605/0.
21. A definition of 'other' penalties can also be found at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2011/12/12131605/0
22. Due to an extreme outlier.
23. Average duration data was not available and comparable percentage data was also not available for cited cases.
24. Numerical data was not readily available to allow this theory to be tested.
25. Available at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/339672/0112278.pdf
26. Available at http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/0038/00386764.pdf
27. The sample was drawn from one case study area only, namely Central, and so some of the findings may reflect the unique position there.
Contact
Email: Carole Wilson
There is a problem
Thanks for your feedback