Advanced Search

How to use this Legal Guidance

CPS Public Consultations

We want to hear your views about our prosecution policy and so we conduct consultations to help inform our policy making.

There are currently no active public consultations but visit the consultations page to view expired consultations and reports

Home » Professionals » Legal Guidance » V to Z » Youth Offenders

Youth Offenders

Updated - 15/04/08

Principle

Relevant Guidance Elsewhere

For guidance concerning the remand provisions for Youth Offenders refer to the section on Bail

Top of page

Introduction

The CPS is committed to ensuring that the special considerations which apply to cases involving a young offender are enshrined in its working practices and form part of the training of its prosecutors. In conjunction with this Chapter, you should also ensure that you have attended the youth training course and have read all its accompanying materials.

The key considerations governing the decisions made by Crown Prosecutors in dealing with youths are those contained in:

  • Section 44 of the Children And Young Persons Act 1933 (Archbold 5-232), which requires the courts to have regard to the welfare of a young person;
  • Section 37 of the Crime And Disorder Act 1998 (Archbold 5-231), which requires the principal aim of agencies involved in the youth justice system to be the prevention of offending by young persons; and
  • The Code for Crown Prosecutors, which states that Crown prosecutors must consider the interests of a youth, amongst other public interest factors, when deciding whether a prosecution is needed.

The Crown Prosecution Service recognises that in applying these considerations Crown Prosecutors will have regard to their obligations arising from the European Convention of Human Rights.

This section of Legal Guidance should be read in conjunction with the Youth Training Manual, which deals with practice and procedure in cases involving youth defendants.

Top of page

Guidance

Criminal Justice System

The CPS is one of several agencies involved within the CJS that deals with youths.

Effective partnerships within the criminal justice system will contribute to securing real improvements in the youth justice system and will help to give effect to Government policy. Such partnerships require mutual cooperation and understanding.

All Areas are encouraged to participate in local inter-agency groups with representatives from the Youth and Crown Courts, local Youth Offending Team managers, police, CPS, appropriate defence representatives and Victim Support Service co-ordinators.

These groups should be responsible for the implementation of youth justice initiatives. For example:

  • Contributing to a reduction of delay in the youth justice system;
  • Monitoring of the expedited file system, i.e. the level of guilty pleas;
  • Use of and checks with the Case Tracker Systems; and
  • Developing good local practice in line with Youth Justice Board recommendations.

Top of page

Area Youth Justice Co-ordinator (AYJC)

The CCP may appoint one or more AYJCs. It will be a matter for the CCP to decide what functions the AYJC will carry out, but they may use the following:

  • Being a 'Service ambassador' providing advice to CCPs on youth matters and liaising at a strategic level on behalf of the CCP with other agencies;
  • Being a focal point for advice on good practice within the Area;
  • Being the point of contact for CPS Headquarters;
  • Having responsibility for monitoring achievements against national and locally agreed targets in the magistrates', youth and Crown Court;
  • Co-ordinating the formulation and implementation of the training of other lawyers in the Area.

The AYJC will have the following qualifications:

  • will be an experienced Youth Offender Specialist; and
  • will continue to carry out the functions of a Youth Offender Specialist.

Top of page

Youth Offender Specialist (YOS)

A YOS will be approved by the CCP or Unit Head.

The YOS will carry out the following functions:

  • Undertaking the review of files involving youth offenders and taking all major decisions in relation to those files;
  • Making regular appearances in the Youth Court; and
  • Together with the Area Youth Justice Co-ordinator, taking part in the formulation and implementation of the training of other lawyers.

In order to be approved as a YOS, a lawyer must:

  • Be a C2 lawyer with adequate experience and appropriate skills; and
  • Have undertaken the Youth Offender Training Course.

Additionally, whenever possible, specialists should be volunteers expressing an interest in dealing with youth offender cases.

Top of page

Case Progression Officers (CPO)

In order to expedite youth cases and those involving persistent young offenders (PYOs) in particular, Areas may appoint Case Progression Officers (CPOs). The role of the CPO is to monitor the processing of files in both the Criminal Justice Unit and the Trial Unit to ensure that time targets are adhered to.

The CPO task can be undertaken at either A2 or B1 level. In some areas where the volume of cases justifies the administrative input, a full-time CPO may be appointed. Other areas may wish to have the CPO functions covered by a Youth Offender Specialist.

Top of page

Handling of Youth Files

Youth offenders must be dealt with expeditiously and prosecutors should have regard to the relevant time targets. Such time targets have at their core the principle that there is little point in conducting a trial for a young offender long after the alleged commission of an offence when the offender will have difficulty in relating the punishment to the offence. To have any impact on the youth offender, the case must be dealt with as soon as possible.

All prosecutors should be able to prosecute Youth Courts and deal with youths connected with adults in the Magistrates' Court.

All prosecutors should be able to carry out an initial review of expedited files prior to the first hearing to enable a Youth to enter a guilty plea if offered.

A Youth Offender Specialist (YOS) will undertake the major reviews of files involving youth offenders and take all major decisions in relation to those files.

Whenever possible, Youth Remand Courts should be prosecuted by a YOS, who will be able to review all the files that are appearing in that Court.

In conducting a Court where a Youth is appearing, the prosecutor must be aware of the need to liaise with the other CJS Agencies and in particular the Youth Offending Team.

Top of page

Principles Guiding the Decision to Prosecute

Whether for the purpose of advising a reprimand or final warning or placing the youth offender before the court, appropriate charges should be selected to reflect adequately the seriousness of the alleged conduct.

Having applied the evidential test and arrived at the appropriate charge(s), Crown prosecutors should consider the public interest criteria. Primarily this is as set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. However prosecutors must also consider what course of action will meet the statutory duty to prevent offending. Prosecutors should ensure that a youth is prosecuted through the courts only where there are clear public interest factors in favour of prosecution. In reaching this decision relevant statutory obligations should be taken into account. These include the Race Relations (Amendment Act) 2000 (see Casework Bulletin 14 of 2001), and any guidelines issued from time to time, such as the Youth Justice Board's Circular of March 2000, - the ACPO Guidelines on Case Disposal Gravity and the CPS Policy Statements on Domestic Violence, Homophobic Crime and Racially and Religiously Aggravated Offences.

A decision whether to prosecute a youth offender is open to judicial review if it can be demonstrated that the decision was made regardless of, or clearly contrary to, a settled policy of the DPP developed in the public interest such as those in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. See also (R v Chief Constable of Kent and Another ex parte L, R v DPP ex parte B (1991) 93 Cr App R 416).

The judgment in this case highlights the importance of obtaining in appropriate cases as much information as possible from sources such as the police and Youth Offender Team(s) (YOTs), about the youth offender's home circumstances and background before reviewing a case. The court held that an application for judicial review could be successful if the decision to prosecute was made against a background of lack of, or insufficient, inquiry into the circumstances and general character of the accused.

It is essential in all youth offender cases to ensure that the public interest considerations, which give rise to the decision, are noted. This demonstrates that the decision to prosecute was taken only after a full review of the case and the background information concerning the suspect provided by the police, or YOT.

Top of page

The Reprimand and Final Warning System

The diversion regime for youth offenders has changed. Cautions were abolished (section 67(8) Crime and Disorder Act 1998) nationally with effect form 1 June 2000 and replaced with the reprimand and final warning scheme (section 65 CDA 1998).

Review of files on public interest grounds should balance the interests of the youth offender with the fact that where a youth has offended after having received a final warning, prevention of offending has not been achieved by diversion.

A prosecution will therefore generally be necessary in order to effect that prevention (see paragraphs 8.8 and 8.9 of the Code for Crown Prosecutors, 2004 edition).

These are the alternatives to a prosecution in dealing with cases:

  • Discontinuance;
  • Reprimand;
  • Final Warning; and
  • Bindover.

Crown Prosecutors should bear in mind that although the ACPO Guidelines are of primary relevance, they are not the final arbiter of whether to proceed or indeed to divert.

Crown Prosecutors should also bear in mind the relevance of Anti Social Behaviour legislation and its availability for aspects of youth offending.

The Reprimand and Final Warning System, as set out in Sections 65 and 66 of the CDA 1998 is governed by two main factors:

  • The seriousness of the offence; and
  • Whether the offender is a repeat offender.

Top of page

Seriousness

A key factor for consideration will be the impact of the offence on the victim(s), or the community (including distinct groups within the community). Wherever possible, the views of these as to that impact should be sought. This could be either through the Victim Personal Statement, if given, or information from the police or from other interested persons such as the members of the family. Also, where practicable, information on the nature and extent of any harm or loss and its significance to the victim and/or the community's should be obtained.

Crown Prosecutors who are not Youth Offender Specialists must refer the decision to prosecute or divert in any - case to a YOS.

It is recognised that there are occasions when youths will appear before a court because they have not met the criteria for a reprimand or a final warning.

Where a case has proceeded to court and the prosecutor decides that a reprimand or final warning can be justified, the matter should be adjourned for consideration of that disposal. Prosecutors are reminded that an admission of guilt is essential before a reprimand or final warning can be given. A youth who denies guilt or declines to answer questions in interview cannot at that stage be the beneficiary of a reprimand or final warning. The necessary consequence is that the possibility of a reprimand or final warning being the ultimate outcome will be substantially reduced. Once a young person has been charged it is likely to be only in exceptional circumstances that a reprimand or final warning will be given and these factors should be considered by those advising young persons at the time at which they are interviewed. (R on the application of F v CPS and Chief Constable of Merseyside Police [2003] EWHC 3266 (Admin))

When adjourning a case for such consideration, prosecutors should bear in mind that there may be factors unknown to the CPS that could affect the disposal of the case. Prosecutors should not raise any expectation that the case will not proceed if a reprimand or final warning is not issued.

If the offence is one covered by the Sexual Offences Act 2003; the youth may be subject to the notification requirements in section 80 (refer to Notification requirements elsewhere in this guidance).

Bindovers should be rare and the reasons for their use should be fully endorsed.

Top of page

Public Interest and Sensitive Issues

General Issues

Guidance is given below on specific areas of work commonly raising sensitive or difficult issues. It is not intended to replace guidance given elsewhere in the Prosecution Manual. For example, guidance on charging practice can be found in the chapter that covers the specific offence - under consideration.

Top of page

Prevalence of the Offence

If the local police force proposes from time to time to devote substantial resources to the investigation of a particularly prevalent offence, the police should be encouraged to discuss this in advance with the CPS. Every case will still finally be judged on its merits. However, it will be appropriate to consider the police objectives and the impact on the community of the offending when reviewing the public interest factor.

Top of page

Welfare Powers

Proceedings should not be taken against a youth offender solely to secure access to the welfare powers of the court.

Top of page

Racism and Religious Hostility

A relatively minor incident may be more serious if there is evidence of racial or religious hostility particularly in the context of a number of incidents of violence or intimidation towards black and minority ethnic communities. Prosecutors should have regard to the availability of racially and religiously aggravated offences.

The existence of a clear racial motivation in an offence or of hostility based on the victim's ethnic or national origin or religion should always be regarded as an aggravating feature pointing towards prosecution, assuming that the evidence itself justifies proceedings.

Top of page

Youths with Mental Disorders, Learning Disabilities and Low Cognitive Ability

A youth offender who is mentally disordered is doubly vulnerable. Prosecutors should have regard to the chapter in this manual concerning mentally disordered offenders.

The term "mental disorder" is used in the Mental Health Act 1983 (Archbold 5-563). This identifies four categories of mental disorder and defines three of them. These categories are the criteria for compulsory admission to hospital under Section 36 of the Act and are inevitably expressed by way of clinical classification. For general guidance on mentally disordered offenders <refer to Mentally Disordered Offenders

These classifications can be unhelpful in relation to youth offenders; they fail to allow for behaviour, which falls short of a disposable condition, but which is nevertheless "disturbed" in the ordinary sense of the word e.g. personality disorders. It follows that when considering a prosecution, reference to "mental disorder" should not be restricted to the Mental Health Act definition as this could restrict decision-making.

Top of page

Public Interest Considerations in relation to Mentally Disordered Offenders

Mentally disordered offenders will often commit offences that are more of a public nuisance than a danger to the public. However, in serious cases where the offender is a danger to the public, the public interest is likely to require a prosecution. In determining where the public interest lies the prosecutor should look particularly to:

  • the seriousness of the offence;
  • the circumstances of any previous offending;
  • the nature of the youth offenders mental condition;
  • the likelihood of repetition; and
  • the availability of suitable alternatives to prosecution.

Reprimand and final warnings can be problematic. Both require sufficient evidence and full recognition of guilt by the offender.

Particular difficulties can arise when mens rea is a component of the offence. The prosecutor must be satisfied that any admissions are genuine. Particular care must be taken when considering whether to administer a reprimand or final warning in a case relying on admissions.

It may be that in a proportion of cases, which might otherwise have attracted such a disposal, that this is not an advisable option, either because of doubts about the truth of any admissions made (in cases where there is little or no supporting evidence), or because of the defendants level of understanding. In such cases taking no further action will usually be the only appropriate way of dealing with the matter short of prosecution. Prosecutors should try and ensure the police are alert to these difficulties and guard against the inappropriate use of the reprimand and final warning system.

The file should include the opinions of the relevant welfare agencies, particularly about the offender's stage of development or understanding of the offence and the perceived likelihood of repetition, the likely effect of proceedings on his or her mental state and the available welfare options. It is particularly important in remand cases that the prosecution is furnished with as much information as possible before making representations to the court. If necessary, an application should be made for the case to be put back until information is available. A plea should not be accepted until the prosecutor has all the available information and has reviewed the file.

Top of page

Trial Procedure for Youths with learning disabilities and low cognitive ability

Trial Procedure

The following trial procedure for youths with learning disabilities and low cognitive ability was laid down by the Administrative Court in R on the application of TP v West London Youth Court EWHC 2583 Admin:

Neither youth nor limited intellectual capacity necessarily leads to breach of the Article 6 ECHR right to effectively participate in a trial. The minimum requirements for a fair trial are that:

  • The youth has to understand what he is said to have done wrong
  • The court must be satisfied that the youth had the means of knowing that an act or omission was wrong at the time of the act or omission
  • The youth had to understand what, if any, defences were available to him
  • The youth must have a reasonable opportunity to make relevant representations if he wished to do so
  • The youth must have the opportunity to consider what representations he wished to make once he had understood the issues involved.

A trial should not be abandoned before all practical steps to overcome the difficulties have been exhausted.

The youth court should take appropriate steps to enable a youth with learning difficulties or mental impairment to participate in his trial including:

  • Keeping the youth's cognitive functioning in mind
  • Using concise and simple language
  • Having regular breaks
  • Taking additional time to explain court proceedings
  • Being proactive in ensuring the youth has access to support
  • Explaining and ensuring the claimant understands the ingredients of the charge
  • Explaining the possible outcomes and sentences
  • Ensuring cross examination is carefully controlled so that questions are short and clear and frustration is minimised.

The judge has a continuing jurisdiction to stay proceedings for abuse of process. If it becomes apparent during the course of the hearing that the claimant is unable effectively to participate, the judge can stay the proceedings at that point. This is better than staying the prosecution at the outset before it is known whether steps can be taken to enable a fair trial to proceed.

In CPS v P [2007] EWHC 946 (Admin), the Administrative Court gave guidance on the procedure to be followed in youth courts when the defence raises issues of capacity.

The Administrative Court answered the following questions posed by the District Judge:

  • Where it is established that a person would be unfit to plead due to their mental capacity in a court of higher authority is it an abuse of process to try them thereafter for subsequent criminal acts?
    • Answer: The fact that a court of "higher authority" has previously held that a person is unfit to plead does not make it an abuse of process to try that person for subsequent criminal acts. The issue of the child's ability to participate effectively must be decided afresh. A child in early adolescence might well develop significantly over a relatively short period of time. It follows that just because the child is agree to be unfit to plead or unable to take part in a trial on one occasion does not mean that he will still be unfit or unable on another.
  • Where the magistrates' court establishes that a person cannot be tried in accordance with R v Barking Youth Court [2002] EWHC Admin 734 and then undertakes an inquiry into whether a defendant did the act alleged, is that a criminal trial?
    • Answer: Where the court decides to proceed to decide whether the person did the acts alleged, the proceedings are not a criminal trial.
  • At what point in proceeding is it necessary for the court to make a decision in accordance with the procedure set out in R v Barking Youth Court [2002] EWHC Admin 734?
    • Answer: The court may consider whether to proceed to decide the facts at any stage. It may do so before hearing evidence or it may stop the criminal procedure and switch to the fact-finding procedure at any stage.
  • Whether the District Judge erred in concluding on the evidence that the defendant did not have the mental capacity to effectively participate in the proceedings and accordingly stayed the proceedings on that basis?
    • Answer: The District Judge should not have stayed the proceedings at the outset as he did without considering the alternative of allowing the trial to proceed while keeping P's situation under constant review
  • Where it is established that a defendant is unfit to plead, to what extent is it necessary for him to participate in any trial of the facts?
    • Answer: If the court proceed with fact-finding only, the fact that the defendant does not or cannot take any part in the proceedings does not render them unfair or in any way improper; the defendant's Article 6 rights are not engaged by that process.

The court confirmed that it is only in exceptional cases that the youth court should exercise its power to stay proceedings before hearing any evidence on the substantive issue.

Medical opinion on the youth's capacity and ability to plead and participate in the trial is not conclusive and will not be the sole answer to the question of whether a youth should be tried for a criminal offence.

It is for the court, not the doctors to decide whether a trial should take place, because it is the court's opinion of the youth's level of understanding which must determine whether a trial takes place. The court must be willing, in appropriate cases to disagree with and reject the medical opinion, and to consider the possibility that the medical evidence might appear in a different light if and when the trial progresses. The court should take into account all relevant evidence, including:

  • Medical evidence
  • Evidence of what the youth is said to have done
  • Evidence of the youth's behaviour on arrest and in interview
  • What the youth said in interview
  • Direct exchange in court between the District Judge or Chair and the youth.

If the court decides not to proceed with a criminal trial because the youth cannot take an effective part in the proceedings, it should consider whether to switch to a fact finding exercise to decide whether the child did the act or made the omission. (This procedure was set out in R v Barking Justices see Mentally Disordered Offenders elsewhere in this guidance.) This option may be appropriate where there is a possibility that a court will make a hospital order or guardianship order (for those aged 16 and 17).

Proceedings should be stayed as an abuse of process before the fact finding exercise only if there would be no useful purpose served by making a finding on the facts. The fact that the youth does not or cannot take any part in the proceedings does not render them unfair or in any way improper. The Article 6 ECHR right to a fair trial is not engaged by this process as it is part of the protective jurisdiction contemplated by the Mental Health Act 1983.

If the court finds that the youth did not do the act or make the omission alleged, the proceedings are terminated by way of an acquittal.

If the court finds that the youth did the acts alleged, it should consider whether to seek further medical evidence with a view to making a hospital order under section 37(3) Mental Health Act 1983. The court may also make a guardianship order if the youth is aged 16 or 17.

If a disposal under the Mental Health Act 1983 is inappropriate, it may be appropriate to alert the local authority to the position, with a view to consideration of care proceedings.

Top of page

Live Links for youth offenders

A youth offender may give evidence in criminal proceedings in the magistrates' court and the Crown Court using a live link if:

  • His ability to participate effectively in the proceedings as a witness giving oral evidence is compromised by his level of intellectual ability or social functioning; AND
  • His ability to participate effectively would be improved by giving evidence over a live link (sec 33A(4) Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 as inserted by section 47 of the Police and Justice Act 2006.);AND
  • The court is satisfied that it is in the interests of justice for the youth to give evidence through a live link.

A live link is defined in sec 33B Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 as an arrangement by which the accused, while absent from the place where the proceedings are being held, is able to see and hear a person there, and to be seen and heard by the judge, justices, jury, co accused, legal representatives and interpreters or any other person appointed by the court to assist the accused.

The defence must apply for a live link direction, which prevents the defendant from giving oral evidence in the proceedings in any manner other than through a live link (s33A (6). The court may discharge a live link direction at any time if it appears in the interests of justice to do so of its own motion or on application by any party. (s33A (7) The court must give reasons in open court for giving or discharging a live link direction or for refusing an application for or the discharge of a live link direction. Those reasons must be recorded on the register of proceedings where the decision was made in the Magistrates court. (s33A (8)

Top of page

Offences against Public Servants carrying out their normal duties

Violence or public order offences directed at or hindering people who are carrying out their public duties is an aggravating factor. The most obvious examples of such people are: doctors, nurses, paramedics, public transport workers, teachers and the police (Casework Bulletin 41 of 1999).

Top of page

Offending Behaviour in Children's homes

The decision to prosecute looked after children for offences committed within a children's home is a major decision and should be taken by a youth specialist, who, wherever possible, will be a volunteer who has attended the CPS Youth Offender Specialist Course and is a Senior Crown Prosecutor.

This guidance is intended to assist youth specialists in determining where the public interest lies when it is alleged that a looked after child has committed an offence in the children's home where he or she lives. It is not intended to apply to all offences committed by looked after children; although some of the principles may be helpful when applying the public interest test to offences committed outside the home.

This guidance should be considered in conjunction with the Code for Crown Prosecutors, CPS policy statements and legal guidance.

Children and young people who live in children's homes are at a high risk of offending behaviour because:

  • Many looked after children are between the ages of 14 and 17, which is regarded as the peak offending age range
  • In some children's homes they are likely to be living with young people who have been remanded to local authority accommodation, and may be susceptible to group offending behaviour
  • They may be living in accommodation far from their home, so may lack support from friends and family
  • Many looked after children display challenging behaviour, which may be a reaction to past experiences of abuse and neglect; and/ or have been diagnosed as experiencing Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorder and Oppositional Defiant Disorder. Their offending behaviour may be caused by or otherwise linked with the disorder.
  • Their behaviour is likely to be more challenging and demanding because of their family experience, the breakdown of foster placements and frequent moves from other children's homes.
  • Living in a group with other challenging and demanding children of the same age gives rise to greater potential for conflict , bullying and peer group pressure

The police are more likely to be called to a children's home than a domestic setting to deal with an incident of offending behaviour by an adolescent. Specialists should bear this in mind when dealing with incidents that take place in a children's home. However, where offending behaviour occurs in a family context, the CPS Domestic Violence Policy would apply wherever a partner, sibling, parent or other family member experiences violence at the hands of a youth. It is important that all people feel safe in the place that they live, whether that is in a family home or children's home and that they have confidence in the criminal justice system to intervene and protect them where this is necessary.

A criminal justice disposal, whether a prosecution, reprimand or warning, should not be regarded as an automatic response to offending behaviour by a looked after child, irrespective of their criminal history. This applies equally to Persistent Young Offenders and adolescents of good character. A criminal justice disposal will only be appropriate where it is clearly required by the public interest.

Informal disposals such as restorative justice conferencing, reparation, acceptable behaviour contracts and disciplinary measures by the home may be sufficient to satisfy the public interest and to reduce the risk of future offending.

Top of page

Behaviour Management policies

All children's homes, whether they are run privately or by the local authority or voluntary sector must comply with the Children's Home Regulations 2001, which are mandatory, and the National Minimum Standards, which are issued by the Secretary of State under section 23 Care Standards Act 2000. These are minimum standards, not examples of good practice, and Homes should aspire to exceed them. Copies of these documents are available at www.doh.gov.uk

Each home must have a written "behaviour management policy" that sets out the measures of control, restraint and discipline which may be used in the children's home and the means whereby appropriate behaviour is to be promoted in the home. A copy of this policy and a statement from the home setting out how the policy has been applied to this incident should accompany any request for advice on charging.

Each home should have a clear written policy, procedures and guidance for staff based on a code of conduct that sets out control, discipline and restraint measures that are permitted and must reinforce positive messages to children for the achievement of acceptable behaviour. The consequences of unacceptable behaviour should be clear to staff and children and must be appropriate to the age, understanding and individual needs of the child. It must also be recognised that unacceptable or challenging behaviour may be the result of illness, bullying, disabilities such as autism, ADHD or communication difficulties.

Standard 22 National Minimum Standards for Children's Homes requires staff to respond positively to acceptable behaviour, and where the behaviour of children is regarded as unacceptable by staff, is responded to by constructive, acceptable and known disciplinary measures approved by the registered person. Control and disciplinary measures should encourage reparation and restitution. Corporal punishment, deprivation of food and drink and punishing a group for the behaviour of an individual may not be used as a disciplinary measure, and financial penalties are restricted to the imposition of a reasonable sum, which may be paid by instalments, by way of reparation. ( Rule 17 CHR 2001)

Unless the registered person can show it is inappropriate, the home should also have procedures and guidance on police involvement in the home, which has been agreed with the local police. Staff should know about the agreement with the police and should be clear when the police should be involved. (para 22.15 National Minimum Standards for Children).

Top of page

The Decision to Prosecute

Specialists are reminded of the need to consider all the circumstances surrounding the offence and the circumstances of the youth before reaching a decision and to apply all relevant CPS policies and documents. Failure to do so may result in proceedings for judicial review: R v Chief Constable of Kent and Another ex parte L, R v DPP ex parte B (1991) 93 Cr App R 416. Factors that should be considered include:

  • The disciplinary policy of the Home.
  • An explanation from the Home regarding their decision to involve the police, which should refer to the procedures and guidance on police involvement.
  • Information from the Home about the recent behaviour of the youth, including similar behaviour and any incidents in the youth's life that could have affected their behaviour, any history between the youth and the victim, any apology or reparation by the youth, history of the incident and any action under the disciplinary policy of the Home.
  • The views of the victim, including their willingness to attend court to give evidence and/or participate in a restorative justice or other diversionary programme.
  • The views of the key worker, social worker, counsellor or CAHMS worker on the effect of criminal justice intervention on the youth, particularly where the youth suffers from an illness or disorder.
  • Any explanation or information about the offence from the looked after child.
  • If the looked after child wishes it to be considered, information about the local authority's assessment of his/her needs and how the placement provided by the Home is intended to address them. The local authority should be able to provide this information as it should be an integral part of the Care Plan for the looked after child.

Specialists should consider all of the aggravating and mitigating features when deciding on the appropriate outcome.

Aggravating features include:

  • The offence is violent or induces the genuine fear of violence in the victim
  • The offence is sexual
  • The offence is motivated by hostility based on the gender, sexuality, disability, race, religion or ethnicity of the victim.
  • The victim is vulnerable
  • The damage or harm caused is deliberate and cannot be described as minor
  • The offence forms part of a series of offences
  • Informal measures have been ineffective in preventing offending behaviour

Mitigating features include:

  • The damage or harm caused is at the lower end of the scale and has been put right.
  • Appropriate action has already been taken under the disciplinary procedure or other informal disposal.
  • Genuine remorse and apology to the victim.
  • The behaviour is a symptom of a disorder or illness that cannot be controlled by medication or diet. Refer also to Mentally Disordered Offenders. Care should be taken where it appears that the youth has deliberately refused medication or deliberately consumed a substance knowing that his or her behaviour will be affected.
  • Isolated incident or out of character.
  • The young person is under extreme stress or appears to have been provoked and has overreacted.

The reasons for the charging/diversion decision should be clearly recorded and show the factors that have been considered by a youth specialist to determine how the public interest is satisfied.

Top of page

Public Order Offences

The general principles of the Code and the reprimand and final warning system should be applied. However, there are aggravating features which may increase the need to prosecute in borderline cases. These include:

  • where the incident in question is not isolated but is either prevalent within an area or is part of a wider incident or series of incidents;
  • where the aggression displayed by members of the group, whether verbal or physical, is directed outside the group at members of the public (such as shopkeepers), and especially so if their attentions are directed at ethnic minorities, the elderly, or other vulnerable people.

Occasionally the police locally may target a particular type of conduct for special attention in an attempt to discourage it. This will have an effect on the number of cases recommended by them for prosecution.

The police should be encouraged to discuss the implications of such a campaign in advance with the CPS. Whilst every case will be considered on its merits, the force objective should be taken into account, as a public interest factor, when deciding whether or not to institute or continue proceedings.

Top of page

School Bullying

Prosecution may not be necessary because of other available alternatives, but there will be cases in which a prosecution is needed in the public interest.

In cases of serious or persistent bullying, prosecutions must be carefully considered. Such cases usually involve one pupil or a group of pupils using their strength or power to induce fear in the victimised pupil, whether or not for a particular purpose such as extortion of money or valuables. They may involve verbal persecution and abuse, physical assault or the threat of it, or even the degradation or humiliation of the victim. Such attacks tend to be systematic and persistent leading to the oppression of a fellow pupil and his or her virtual isolation from the support and friendship of others.

It is important to differentiate occasional jibes from systematic bullying of children because of ethnic origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability.

In all cases relevant considerations will include:

  • any background to the incident in question including any history of bullying of the same victim by the offender or generally;
  • the attitude and behaviour of the offender and the offender's parent(s) or guardian(s);
  • the effect of the behaviour on the victim;
  • any internal remedies already taken by the school whether in connection with the incident or in the past, such as, where the victim and offender no longer attend the same school.

It is important to ensure that the seriousness of the conduct is accurately and appropriately reflected in the seriousness of the charge.

If school bullying incidents are regularly referred for prosecution (particularly if they are often appropriate for reprimands or final warning), it may well be necessary for the AYJC/local CPS to contact the local police department and the YOT responsible for youth offender cases with a view to them examining the policies of the local schools and the police.

All schools should have internal procedures and strategies for dealing with these incidents. It may be necessary to explore with the police and the YOT whether certain schools are in fact accepting their responsibility in this area fully.

In such cases the file should include information on the background of the incident, any previous incident and any disciplinary measures taken by the school.

If the incident has taken place outside school but is connected to conduct occurring at school the same information described above is relevant. Schools often feel unable to act in these circumstances.

Top of page

Motoring Offences

All offences, including motoring and minor traffic offences are included in the reprimand/final warning scheme. However, under the Home Office Guidelines, "Where a young person commits a minor traffic offence, a fixed penalty notice remains an appropriate response for 16 and 17 year olds".

The police deal with the majority of minor motoring offences without reference to CPS. However, when dealing with minor traffic offences a prosecutor should bear in mind the effects of the reprimand/final warning scheme and consider carefully the impact of his decision on the youth.

Some examples of the impact of the reprimand/final warning scheme are as follows:

A final warning for no insurance will result in a youth being prosecuted for any other offence he or she commits.

A successful prosecution for no insurance is not a recordable offence and therefore will probably mean that a youth will not be prosecuted for the next offence that he commits.

A successful prosecution for no insurance will cause penalty points to be endorsed on a youth's licence that could result in the licence being suspended by DVLA and the youth being required to re-take the driving test. Such a consequence may have a substantial impact on the youth's employment prospects.

In adult cases, it is possible to cite previous convictions/cautions for use within the s.12 procedure under the Road Traffic Act. However, the Road Traffic Act and Magistrates' Court Act procedures for citing previous convictions do not apply in the Youth Court. However, Rule 10 of the Magistrates' Court (Children and Young Persons) Rules 1992 provides that the Court should take into account the general conduct of the youth on sentence. The existence of a previous reprimand/final warning is relevant information.

The police should therefore serve a Notice of Intention to Cite Previous Reprimands and Final Warnings under the Rule 10 of the Magistrates' Court (Children and Young Persons) Rules 1992 with the summons. Failure to give such notice will mean that the Court will not be able to take into account the previous reprimand/final warning, which may materially affect the sentence.

Top of page

Sexual Offences and Child Abuse by Young Offenders

This guidance expands on, and should be read in conjunction with other specific sections elsewhere in this guidance Sexual Offences. Also note the Notification requirements. Any decision to prosecute or not to prosecute should be free of discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation and gender.

If an allegation of any sexual abuse committed by a youth offender has been fully investigated and there is sufficient evidence to justify instituting proceedings, the balance of the public interest must always be carefully considered before any prosecution is commenced. Positive action may need to be taken at an early stage of offending of this type. Although a reprimand or final warning may provide an acceptable alternative in some cases, in reaching any decision, the police and the CPS will have to take into account fully the view of other agencies involved in the case, in particular the Social Services. The consequences for the victim of the decision whether or not to prosecute, and any views expressed by the victim or the victim's family should also be taken into account.

In child abuse cases, it will be important to have the views of the Social Services on file if at all possible, as well as any background or history of similar conduct, information about the relationship between the two and the effect a prosecution might have on the victim.

Any case referred to the CPS for advice, or in which a prosecution does proceed, must be dealt with as quickly as possible to minimise the delay before the case comes to court.

Irrespective of whether the evidence is sufficient to found a criminal prosecution, The Social Services will consider taking civil action, such as care proceedings, to protect the child. The police and the CPS may well be asked to disclose evidence to assist in this process. Great care should be taken to follow the guidance set out in the section on disclosure to third parties Refer to Disclosure to Third Parties

Top of page

Rape and other offences against children under 13 (sections 5 to 8 Sexual Offences Act 2003)

A mistaken belief that the child under 13 was 16 or over and consented to intercourse is not a defence to an allegation of rape of a child under 13, assault of a child under 13 by penetration, sexual assault of a child under 13 or causing or inciting a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity contrary to Sections 5 to 8 Sexual Offences Act 2003 respectively.

When reviewing a case, in which a youth under 18 is alleged to have committed an offence contrary to sections 5 to 8, careful regard should be paid to the following factors:

  • the relative ages of both parties;
  • the existence of and nature of any relationship;
  • the sexual and emotional maturity of both parties and any emotional or physical effects as a result of the conduct;
  • whether the child under 13 in fact freely consented (even though in law this is not a defence) or a genuine mistake as to her age was in fact made;
  • whether any element of seduction, breach of any duty of responsibility to the girl or other exploitation is disclosed by the evidence.

If the sexual act or activity was in fact genuinely consensual and the youth and the child under 13 concerned are fairly close in age and development, a prosecution contrary to sections 5 to 8 is unlikely to be appropriate. Action falling short of prosecution may be appropriate. In such cases, the parents and/or welfare agencies may be able to deal with the situation informally.

However, if a very young child has been seduced by a youth, or a baby-sitter in a position of responsibility has taken advantage of a child under 13 in his/her care, prosecution is likely to be in the public interest. Where a child under 13 has not given ostensible consent to the activity, then a prosecution contrary to sections 5 to 8 is likely to be the appropriate course of action.

It will be important to have the views of the Social Services on file if at all possible, as well as any background or history of similar conduct, information about the relationship between the two and the effect a prosecution might have on the victim.

Refer to Sexual Offences

Rape of a child under 13 (section 5), assault of a child under 13 by penetration (section 6) and causing or inciting a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity that involves penetration (section 8) are indictable only offences with a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. The offences of sexual assault of a child under 13 (section 7), causing or inciting a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity where there has been no penetration (section 8) are punishable on indictment with imprisonment for a term not exceeding 14 years. They are all "grave crimes" for the purposes of section 24 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 and s.91 Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000.

Top of page

Child sex offences committed by children or young persons

Section 13 of the 2003 Act makes it an offence for a youth under 18 to have sexual activity with a child under 16, cause or incite a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity, engage in sexual activity in the presence of a child under or cause a child under 16 to watch a sexual act. These offences are punishable on indictment with imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years. They are "grave crimes" for the purposes of section 24 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 and section 91 Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. Section 13 (2) (a) purports to restrict the maximum penalty on summary conviction to a maximum of 6 months imprisonment, although this should be read in the light of section 101 (2) Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 to allow a Detention and Training Order of up to 24 months.

An offence is not committed if the child is over 13 but is under 16 and the youth has a reasonable belief that the child is 16 or over.

It should be noted that where both parties to sexual activity are under 16, then they may both have committed a criminal offence. However, the overriding purpose of the legislation is to protect children and it was not Parliament's intention to punish children unnecessarily or for the criminal law to intervene where it was wholly in appropriate. Consensual sexual activity between, for example, a 14 or 15 year-old and a teenage partner would not normally require criminal proceedings in the absence of aggravating features. The relevant considerations include:

  • the respective ages of the parties;
  • the existence and nature of any relationship
  • their level of maturity;
  • whether any duty of care existed;
  • whether there was a serious element of exploitation.

Refer also to Sexual Offences.

Top of page

Prostitution

Youth offender prostitution, whether involving young girls or boys, can be one of the most difficult types of cases to deal with. The young people concerned are likely to be extremely vulnerable and present complex emotional problems.

When reviewing a case involving youth offender prostitution it is essential that you are aware of and familiar with the interagency guidance entitled "Safeguarding Children Involved in Prostitution", published in 2000). See also (Casework Bulletin No 13 of 2000): 'Safeguarding Children Involved in Prostitution'.

The aim of this guidance is to both safeguard and promote the welfare of children, and to encourage the investigation and prosecution of criminal activities by those who coerce, exploit and abuse children through prostitution. One of the key purposes of the guidance is to encourage the agencies and professionals involved to treat a child (defined as a boy or girl under the age of 18) involved in prostitution as primarily a victim of abuse.

Paragraph 6.21 of the guidance states that the approach to be adopted in cases of child prostitution is one of diversion of the child from the criminal justice system and a welfare approach is to be adopted. At paragraphs 6.21-6.30, the guidance sets out the approach to be followed when deciding whether it will be appropriate to prosecute or administer a reprimand or final warning to a child involved in prostitution. This section of the Guidance replaces the Home Office Circular 109/50 insofar as the Circular dealt with the cautioning of a child, male or female, under the age of 18 involved in prostitution.

Top of page

Familial Sexual Offences

Sections 25 and 26 Sexual Offences Act 2003 create the offences of sexual activity with a child family member and inciting a child family member to engage in sexual activity. These offences are punishable on indictment with imprisonment for a term not exceeding 5 years. They are "grave crimes" for the purposes of section 24 Magistrates' Courts Act 1980 and section 91 Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. Section 25 (5) (b) and 26 (5) (b) purport to restrict the maximum penalty on summary conviction to a maximum of 6 months imprisonment, although this should be read in the light of section 101 (2) Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 to allow a Detention and Training Order of up to 24 months.

Sections 64 and 65 Sexual Offences Act 2003 make it an offence for a person aged 16 or over to penetrate or consent to penetration by a family member who is aged 18 or over. The maximum penalty is imprisonment for a term not exceeding 2 years (sections 64 (5) and 65 (5)).

In cases of sexual activity between siblings , care should be taken to balance the public interest in prosecuting such conduct with the interests and welfare of the victim and the family unit. As a general rule, alternatives to prosecution should be sought where the sexual activity was wholly consensual. The welfare agencies will normally intervene.

Prosecution should be considered where there is evidence of:

  • seduction;
  • coercion;
  • exploitation or violence;
  • a significant disparity in age;

In all cases the effect of prosecution on a victim and family should be taken into account and if the views of the welfare agencies are not included with the file they should be sought.

Top of page

Venue: Policy Guidance on Venue Representations where youths are charged with offences capable of being tried on indictment.

All youths charged alone shall, be tried summarily in the Youth Court, unless:

  • The offence is homicide

or

  • section 51A Firearms Act 1968 applies i.e. the youth is aged 16 or 17 and is charged with an offence contrary to section 5 (1) (a), (ab), (aba), (ac), (ad), (ae), (af), 5 (1)(c) or section 5(1)(A)(a) Firearms Act 1968 i.e. possession or distribution of certain prohibited weapons or ammunition or distributing a firearm disguised as another object.

or

  • the magistrates decline jurisdiction under Section 24 Magistrates Court Act 1980 (Stones 1-2053) because the offence is a 'grave crime' as defined in Section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 and decide that the offender should be sentenced pursuant to the provisions of that section.

or

  • the youth is charged with a "specified offence" as defined in section 224 Criminal Justice Act 2003 and he has been sent for trial as it appears to the magistrates that if he is convicted, the criteria for imposing a sentence of indeterminate detention for public protection ( sec 226(3)) or an extended sentence (sec 228(2)) would be met. (sec 51A (2) and (3) (d) Crime and Disorder Act 1998.)

A youth convicted in the youth court or magistrates court of a "specified offence" as defined in section 224 Criminal Justice Act 2003 may be committed to Crown Court for sentence if the magistrates decide that the criteria for the imposition of a sentence of indeterminate detention for public protection (sec 226(3)) or an extended sentence (sec 228(2)) appear to be met. (Sec 3C PCC(S) A 2000)

<See Dangerous Offenders elsewhere in Guidance>

The question of venue for youths who are charged with grave crimes, specified offences or jointly charged with an adult should be considered at an early stage. Venue should be considered by a Youth Offender Specialist (YOS) on initial review of the file and kept under review until the issue is decided by the court. The decision of the YOS on venue together with reasons must be recorded on the file.>

Top of page

Dangerousness

The Youth specialist should consider the principles set out by Rose LJ in CPS v South East Surrey Youth Court and MG [2005] EWHC 2929 (Admin)

  1. The policy of the legislature, as correctly identified by Leveson J in R (on the application of H, A and O) v Southampton Youth Court [2004] EWHC 2912 Admin (Refer to Grave Crimes) and approved by the Divisional Court in R (on the application of the CPS) v Redbridge Youth Court [2005] EWHC 1390 Admin. is that those who are under 18 should, wherever possible, be tried in a youth court, which is best designed for their specific needs.
  2. The guidance given by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) in particular in paragraph 17 of the judgment in Lang and Others, particularly in (iv) in relation to non- serious specified offences i.e. "if the foreseen specified offence is not serious, there will be comparatively few cases in which a risk of serious harm will properly be regarded as significant".
  3. The need, in relation to those under 18, to be particularly rigorous before concluding that there is a significant risk of serious harm by the commission of further offences: such a conclusion is unlikely to be appropriate in the absence of a pre- sentence report following assessment by a young offender team.
  4. In most cases where a non-serious specified offence is charged, an assessment of dangerousness will not be appropriate until after conviction, when, if the dangerousness criteria are met, the defendant can be committed to Crown Court for sentence - a procedure with which the Crown Court has, for many years, been familiar.
  5. When a youth under 18 is jointly charged with an adult, an exercise of judgment will be called for by the Youth Court when assessing the competing presumptions in favour of (a) joint trial of those jointly charged and (b) the trial of youths in the youth Court. Factors relevant to the judgment will include the age and maturity of the youth, the comparative culpability in relation to the offence and the previous convictions of the two and whether the trial can be severed without either injustice or undue inconvenience to witnesses.

There will be few cases in which it will be appropriate to exercise the power to send a youth for trial under section 51A (3) (d) Crime and Disorder Act 1998. It should only be exercised where:

  • there is sufficient information, which will usually include a risk assessment in a recent pre sentence report, about the nature and circumstances of the Offender, the offence and any pattern of behaviour of which the offence forms part for the youth court to allow the court to assess the offender as dangerous; AND
  • it is in the interests of justice for the youth to be tried on indictment

Prosecutors should usually recommend summary trial on the basis that the youth court is the appropriate tribunal for youth trials. Summary trial will usually reduce delay, which is particularly important where the youth is a Persistent Young Offender, and will allow more youth CO defendants to be tried together. Trial on indictment is unnecessary as the youth can be committed for sentence under section 3C Powers of Criminal Courts Act 2000 if , having heard all the facts about the offence and the offender, the court decides that a sentence under the dangerousness provisions may be necessary.

In exceptional cases where there is sufficient information for the court to determine dangerousness and it is in the interests of justice for the youth to be tried on indictment, prosecutors should represent that the youth should be sent for trial under section 51A (3)(d) Crime and Disorder Act 1998. The decision to represent trial on indictment should be taken by a youth specialist and full reasons should be recorded on the file.

If the court decides that the criteria for sending the youth under section 51A (3) (d) Crime and Disorder Act 1998 are not met and the offence is also a "grave crime", the prosecution and the defence will be invited to address the court on the appropriate venue for trial. Prosecutors should make representations in accordance with the principles set out in R on the application of H, A and O) v Southampton Youth Court [2004] EWHC 2912 Admin Grave Crimes and the Criminal Casework Minute: Youths Charged with Grave Crimes (POL/09/2005).

When a youth is to be sentenced for a specified offence and the criteria for imposing an extended sentence or an indeterminate sentence for public protection appear to be met, the prosecutor should assist the court by drawing to its attention:

  • information about the nature and circumstances of the offence
  • information about any pattern of behaviour of which the offence forms part, including recent antecedents and the details of those offences
  • information about the offender

When the sentencing hearing takes place in the youth court, the prosecutor should remind the court of its power to commit for sentence under section 3C Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000.

Top of page

Grave Crimes

In all cases involving a grave crime, the magistrates should be invited to consider the question of venue (Archbold 5-286).

The reviewing lawyer should bear in mind the principles set out by Leveson J. with the approval of the Vice President of the Court of Appeal in R on the application of H,A and O v Southampton Youth Court [2004] EWHC 2912 Admin when the issue of venue is considered ;

  1. The general policy of the legislature is that those who are under 18 years of age and in particular children of under 15 years of age should, wherever possible, be tried in the youth court. It is the court which is best designed to meet their specific needs. A trial in the Crown Court with the inevitably greater formality and greatly increased number of people involved (including a jury and the public) should be reserved for the most serious cases.
  2. It is a further policy of the legislature that, generally speaking, first time offenders aged 12 to 14 and all offenders under 12 should not be detained in custody and decisions as to jurisdiction should have regard to the fact that the exceptional power to detain for grave offences should not be used to water down the general principle. Those under 15 will rarely attract a period of detention and, even more rarely, those who are under 12.
  3. In each case the court should ask itself whether there is a real prospect , having regard to his or her age, that this defendant whose case they are considering might require a sentence of, or in excess of, two years or, alternatively, whether although the sentence might be less than two years, there is some unusual feature of the case which justifies declining jurisdiction, bearing in mind that the absence of a power to impose a detention and training order because the defendant is under 15 is not an unusual feature.

The file endorsement should also list the aggravating features of the offence and any recent and relevant sentencing authorities. (See Part E4 Current Sentencing Practice for appeal cases concerning long term detention of children and young people).

In determining the appropriate venue for the trial of grave crimes, case law has traditionally indicated that previous convictions are irrelevant: (R v Hammersmith Juvenile Court ex parte O (1988) 86 Cr App R 343). Most youth courts have taken the pragmatic approach, following the advice of the Justices' Clerks Society, of allowing the prosecutor to allude to the defendant's antecedent history in order to decide venue. R (on the application of T) v Medway Youth Court (2003) EWHC 2279 Admin. supports this view. However, this may change in the light of the decision in R on the application of H A and O v Southampton Youth Court (above)

Top of page

Adult Co-defendants

Where a youth offender is jointly charged with an adult, the charge shall be heard in the adult magistrates' court: Section 46 (1) CYPA 1933. In every either-way or indictable only case, the court must only commit or send the youth offender to the Crown Court for trial with an adult where it is necessary in the interests of justice to do so. In considering whether or not a youth offender should be committed for trial to the Crown Court with an adult CO-accused, prosecutors should assist the court to exercise its discretion to commit the youth by making representations. The relevant factors include:

  • the respective ages of the adult and youth;
  • the respective roles of the youth and adult in the commission of the offence;
  • the likely plea
  • whether there are existing charges against the youth before the Youth Court;
  • the need to deal with the youth as expeditiously as possible consistent with the interests of justice; and
  • the likely sentence upon conviction.

Top of page

ECHR Points

There is no reason why youths charged with grave crimes should not, where appropriate, be tried in the Crown Court. In R v United Kingdom and T v United Kingdom [1999] the European Court was asked to consider, inter alia, whether the killers of James Bulger had received a fair trial in the Crown Court in contravention of Article 6, and whether the trial itself amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment in contravention of Article 3.

The Court held that the particular features of the Crown Court trial process did not cause suffering going beyond that inevitably engendered by any attempt to deal with the defendants for the offence in question and therefore Article 3 was not contravened.

However, the Court held that the defendants had not received a fair trial in contravention of Article 6 because of the intense media and public interest prior to the trial, the obviously media and public presence in court during the trial and because insufficient adjustments had been made to the Crown Court trial procedure to enable the defendants to participate fully in the trial bearing in mind their ages, level of maturity and intellectual and emotional capacity. The Court did not rule that youth trials in the Crown Court are unfair per se.

As a consequence of the decision of the European Court, Bingham LCJ issued a Practice Direction addressing the arrangements which should be made for the trial of children in the Crown Court (Practice Direction: (Crown Court: Trial of Children and Young Persons) (2000) (Archbold 4-96a). This takes account of the particular concern expressed by the European Court. Prosecutors should be familiar with the provisions of the Practice Direction and should ensure that a copy is annexed to the brief to counsel instructed to conduct a trial of a youth in the Crown Court.

Both the Divisional Court and the Court of Appeal have recently confirmed that arguments under the ECHR relating to this issue are matters for the Crown Court judge and he or she will have to determine, in his or her discretion, how to conduct the trial, who to allow into the courtroom and to what extent publicity should be allowed, and that a judge who has considered these issues is entitled to rule that a youth could be fairly tried in the Crown Court: (R v Devizes Youth Court ex parte A and others (2000); (R v C (a Minor) TLR 5/7/2000).

Prosecutors should resist arguments in the youth court that Crown Court trials of youths amount to abuse of process. That is an argument for the Crown Court. Prosecutors should familiarise themselves with the guidance contained in Casework Bulletin 22 of 2000 and the advice of Treasury Counsel attached and ensure that this is included in the Crown Court brief.

Where a youth is to be tried in the Crown Court, whether alone or jointly with other youths or adults, it is essential that a full record is made on the file, and that note copied in the brief to Counsel showing the detailed consideration that has been given to the question of venue .The file endorsement and brief should also include the details of the representations made to the youth court and case law relevant to sentencing. Without such details Counsel for the Crown may be unable to respond adequately to the sort of criticism levelled at the CPS in the case of R v DLB Casework Bulletin 11 of 2001.

Top of page