OFFICE INSPECTION - PAISLEY
24 & 25 JANUARY 2006
Background
In accordance with our Business Plan, we are committed to regular audits of District and Area Offices to ensure compliance with race relations, policies and strategies.
This is our report of the Procurator Fiscal's Office at Paisley. The Paisley office is part of the Argyll & Clyde Area.
Methodology
Our approach to office inspections involves consideration of the following areas:
- Adherence to policy guidelines in relation to prosecution of racist crime
- Use of interpreters and translation issues
- Employment issues
- Consultation with communities
- Deaths involving racial and/or cultural awareness issues.
- Complaints against the police which are of a criminal nature
The following measures are taken to perform the inspection process.
Sampling of Race Charges
The Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service (COPFS) has a single corporate database (herein referred to as the National Database) that connects all Procurator Fiscal Offices and Crown Office units, and facilitates the transfer of legal casework. An extract of data from the National Database is obtained from Management Information Division in Crown Office, containing details of all charges with a racial element reported to Fiscal Offices over the course of financial years 2003-04 and 2004-05. It is worth noting that the database is an operational one, not statistical, and hence is 'live', being constantly updated as cases progress. As such the extract is a 'snapshot' as at date of extraction (current extract relates to 'as at' June 2005).
The general sample
We are concerned with the statutory race charges, as created by the Crime and Disorder Act 1988. A sample of Section 50A racial charges and charges with Section 96 racial aggravations recorded against them is drawn from the most recent 12 months' worth of data contained in the extract and the related case papers were requested from the office and examined by the team. Those charges are those that appear, as recorded on the database, to have been dealt with in accordance with the guidelines - this part of the sampling exercise was designed simply to be an independent check on compliance with policy.
The charges are drawn using a stratified random sampling method. For details on the sampling methodology employed, please contact Kirsty MacLean (e-mail Kirsty.maclean@scotland.gsi.gov.uk) or telephone 0141 229 6203).
The risk-assessed sample
Our inspection process is partly based on risk assessment. Therefore, in addition to the general sample referred to above, all case papers containing any charges which appear, as recorded on the database, to have been dealt with in contravention to the guidelines, are specifically requested for examination. Given the potential importance of such cases and since these charges are of particular interest to us, we request the relevant case papers in relation all such charges over a longer time period than that for the general sample (24 months as compared to 12 months).
The contraventions of policy that can be identified from examination of the data extract are charges in respect of which a fiscal fine or warning letter have been issued, or proceedings taken in the District Court. (Note however that revised guidance from Crown Office was issued to staff on 23 June 2004, which thereafter made it possible to issue a warning letter in exceptional circumstances, with the agreement of the Area Fiscal).
Case papers are also requested which contain any charges that are recorded on the database as being unmarked (i.e. no decision yet taken as to how to proceed), or any charges where no proceedings have been taken (given the policy to always proceed where there is sufficient evidence). Case papers are also requested which contained any charges marked for 'merge' (this is where the marking Depute has decided to amalgamate one or more charges reported by the police, usually for sound legal reasons). Any other charges that appear to have been marked and/or dealt with in an unusual or unexpected manner (e.g. charges/cases which have been deserted) are also requested for inspection.
Case papers are also requested to be made available for inspection, regarding any deaths which were reported and investigated over the previous 12 month period where:
- special consideration was required, as defined in Annexe 3 in Chapter 12 of the Book of Regulations (racial and cultural awareness)
- the ethnicity of the deceased was in some way related to the cause of death (eg the murder of someone from a minority ethnic background).
A questionnaire covering a number of issues related to the areas for consideration (as outlined above) is sent to the office in advance of the inspection and returns are analysed to allow exploration of any issues raised in the returns, at the time of the inspection.
The composition of staff in post (numbers, grades and ethnicity) in the office is considered prior to the inspection visit. Similarly considered is the proportion of staff who have attended the Diversity Awareness Programme.
2001 Census data was obtained from the General Register Office for Scotland (GROS) showing Sheriff Court Districts (which equate to Fiscal Office area) by ethnic group, to allow us to consider the staff ethnicity information in the context of local population ethnic mix.
Race Crime
Crown Office policy on the prosecution of race crime is a robust one and the execution of the policy is closely monitored by the Department. A member of legal staff decides what course of action to take in each case, this is then checked by the District Fiscal for compliance with the Departmental policy and a copy of the case is then sent to the Area Fiscal. Responsibility for the monitoring of compliance in such cases lies with the Area Fiscal. Three-monthly reports from the Areas are considered at the Legal and Policy Forum.
Table 1 - Racial Charges and Racial Aggravations reported to Paisley Fiscal Office, 2003-04 and 2004-05
| 2003-04 | 2004-05 |
Section 50A(1) (a) charges | 9 | 4 |
Section 50A(1) (b) charges | 77 | 88 |
Section 96 aggravations | 27 | 39 |
The data extracted from the National Database revealed that in respect of the Paisley office, in financial year (FY) 2003-04:
9 Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
77 Section 50A(1) (b) charges were reported
27 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them were reported
And in FY 2004-05:
4 Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
88 Section 50A(1) (b) charges were reported
39 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them were reported
In relation to the following discussion of the sampling that is carried out, please note that the number of case papers requested is not the same as number of charges drawn for sampling because a case can (and frequently does) contain more than one charge. Since the sampling is conducted at charge level, in some instances, more than one charge from a single case is selected into the sample. This meant that the number of case papers requested is lower than the number of individual charges selected.
The general sample
A sample of 41 Section 50A charges and 18 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them were drawn, in addition to the 23 charges which were automatically selected. Resulting from the sampling exercise therefore, a total of 58 case papers (82 charges) were subsequently requested for inspection.
In respect of the sample of 41 Section 50A charges, the office was unable to find 3 cases (containing 3 charges). With regard, therefore to the remaining 38 charges (38 cases) we found that marking policy had been complied with in all but one case where it was not clear that there had been enough evidence to proceed on a Section 50A charge although there was probably enough evidence to have proceeded on a breach of the peace charge with a Section 96 aggravation. Of the 32 cases taken to court, we found compliance with policy in respect of conduct during court proceedings in 30 cases (30 charges). There were a further 2 cases (2 charges) where policy was not complied with. In respect of one of these cases there appeared to be sufficient evidence but a plea of not guilty was accepted, albeit as part of a plea negotiation with another race case involving the same accused. In respect of the second case a plea of not guilty was accepted from one of the two accused, however, the victim (a police officer) had been consulted prior to the acceptance of the plea.
In respect of the sample of 18 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, the office was unable to find 3 cases (containing 3 charges). We further found that 8 of the charges did not in fact have Section 96 aggravations attached to them, as had been indicated by the database (see following paragraph for discussion if this issue). With regard therefore to the remaining 7 charges (7 cases) we found that marking policy was complied with in 5 out of the 7 cases. In the other 2 cases, the police had correctly reported the offences as Section 50A charges, but the marking depute had chosen to pursue them as Section 96 aggravations. However, this means that, the cases were still proceeded with as 'race' cases. Compliance of conduct during court proceedings was evident in all relevant cases.
With regard to charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, we encountered a problem. In relation to at least 8 out of 18 charges, there was a discrepancy between the database extract and the case papers examined, in that the database showed these charges to have Section 96 aggravations attached, whereas the case papers showed that they did not. In effect what this meant was the sample of charges that had been drawn contained a number of 'false positives'.
We have drawn this to the attention of the relevant parties.
The risk-assessed sample
A total of 23 charges (17 case papers) were automatically requested for inspection. These consisted of:
5 charges recorded as being marked to receive a warning letter; 3 reported in FY 2003-04 and the other 2 reported in FY 2004-05
7 charges recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', reported in FY 2004-05
One charge recorded as being marked to be 'merged', reported in FY 2004-05
One charge which was part of a case recorded as being 'Deserted Pro Loco et Tempore' - deserted meantime, but with the possibility that it may be taken up at some point in the future
One charge which was part of a case recorded as 'still active' (i.e. not closed) but which had no future court date
One charge with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against it, recorded as being marked to receive a warning letter, reported in FY 2004-05
6 charges with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against them, recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', reported in FY 2004-05
One charge with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against it, recorded as being 'Deserted Pro Loco et Tempore' - deserted meantime, but with the possibility that it may be taken up at some point in the future
In respect of the 23 charges (17 case papers) that were automatically selected (as detailed above) we found that:
Of the 5 charges recorded as being marked for a warning letter:
- In respect of 2 charges (2 cases), the decision to issue a warning letter was deemed correct in the circumstances.
- In respect of another charge, the case turned out not to be a race case and hence inspection was not relevant.
- The remaining case (containing 2 requested charges) could not be found by the office
Of the 7 charges recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings':
In respect of one charge, marking policy was not complied with. There was a lack of corroboration for the Section 50A charge, but a Section 96 racial aggravation could have been added to the breach of the peace charge and was not.
In respect of 4 charges (1 case), the correct decision was made and marking policy was complied with and the police charges were simply merged.
In respect of another charge, marking policy was also complied with, as there was no evidence of a racial element to the offence.
In respect of the other charge, marking policy was also complied with, as there was no corroboration.
Of the charge recorded as being marked to be merged:
Of the charge which was part of a case recorded as being 'Deserted Pro Loco et Tempore':
Of the charge which was part of a case recorded as 'still active' (i.e. not closed) but which had no future court date:
Of the charge with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against it, recorded as being marked to receive a warning letter, reported in FY 2004-05:
- The decision to issue a warning letter in this instance was correct, and had been approved by the Area Fiscal. The case involved an accused with mental health issues and was in fact an example of good practice, both by the police and fiscal.
Of the 6 charges with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against them, recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', reported in FY 2004-05:
In respect of two charges, marking policy was complied with and the correct decisions were taken.
Inspection of the other 4 cases (4 charges) revealed that these charges did not in fact have Section 96 aggravations attached to them (see preceding section on the general sample for discussion of this issue)
Of the charge with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against it, recorded as being 'Deserted Pro Loco et Tempore':
Monitoring of race crime
The Area Business Assistant is responsible for collating all the Area information relating to race crime and preparing the draft Area Report. The Area Procurator Fiscal reviews the relevant case papers and the report.
Race monitoring figures are discussed at the quarterly area management meetings.
In Paisley form A's and B's are completed by the marking depute and passed to the District Fiscal along with the case papers for checking and signing. Occasionally Deputes do not complete the appropriate forms or complete them but file them in the papers.
It was noted that the office could not be sure that all form A's and B's are completed. Paisley is not alone with this problem, as we have highlighted in other reports. We understand that in the spring there will be an upgrade of software, which should overcome this problem, allowing monitoring of all race cases to be more tightly controlled.
The Area Fiscal discusses the race monitoring figures quarterly with District Fiscals at Area Management meetings and at office visits. Any shortcomings are drawn to the attention of the District Fiscal who is asked to communicate them to the Police Divisional Commander to ensure that any issue on the quality of police reports is fed back to the Division.
Interpreters
Six of the cases that were inspected required interpreting services. In 3 cases these needs were met; one of these cases additionally required translation services and this need was met also. However, in respect of one case - which was deserted - it was not clear from the papers if the witnesses had been cited in a language they could understand. In the other 2 cases, there was insufficient information submitted by the police on interpreting and translation issues and the fiscal did not appear to have followed this up.
The Paisley office orders interpreters through Global Language Services. Approximately 70 bookings have been made for interpreting services during period 1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005.
There is no known dissatisfaction with any of the interpreters booked and Global Language Service always fill in their part of the interpreters monitoring form but, in common with many offices, the legal member of staff who took the case in Court does not always fill these in.
The Area Business Assistant reviews the invoices received and will discuss any issues arising with the Agency.
The requesting of interpreters for Paisley office and indeed the whole Area is done by the Area Business Assistant. In Paisley the marking depute will have marked that an interpreter is required, after the trial diet is set a member of admin staff will e-mail the Area Business Assistant who will book the interpreter by phone and fax and confirm this to admin with the name of the interpreter. All confirmed bookings are detailed in a diary and checked off once the invoice has been approved and paid.
Additionally there have been 12 requests for documents to be translated in this period.
Deaths
There were no deaths reported in Paisley within the period concerned (1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005) where racial and cultural considerations were a feature.
Complaints Against The Police
The Procurator Fiscal deals with complaints against Police Officers of a criminal nature and we seek to monitor those with a minority ethnic dimension.
In the relevant period no such complaints were reported.
Employment
Latest data [1] shows that almost 98 per cent of the population in the Paisley Sheriff Court District area is from a white background. Other ethnic groups, of which Pakistani is the largest at 0.9 per cent, account for just over 2 per cent.
As at 1st January 2006, Paisley had a staff of 61, consisting of:
Legal staff
Administrative staff
6 Precognition Officers
1 Band F/G staff
2 Band D staff
4 Band C staff
3 Personal Assistants
24 Band B staff
Casual staff
There are no members of staff who are from a minority ethnic background (as self-reported to Human Resources Division in COPFS via survey) in the Paisley office. Minority ethnic representation in the area, however, is relatively high, at just over 2 per cent.
Efforts are made locally when recruiting Band B staff to advertise vacancies within the minority ethnic communities and information on vacancies passed to the West of Scotland Racial Equality Council secondee to circulate to contacts within the minority ethnic communities as well as in local Job Centres.
Diversity Awareness
As at 1 June 2005, 93 per cent of staff in the Paisley office had attended the Departmental Diversity Awareness Programme. All other relevant staff have re-scheduled to attend at a later date.
One member of staff had undertaken the University of Paisley course on Professional Practice on Race Equality and two more members of staff from the Area are currently on the course.
The Office has had the benefit of a part-time secondee from the West of Scotland Racial Equality Council and circulation of information on minority ethnic festivals, namely Ramadan and Eid, have been welcomed with interest by staff.
Consultation
The Paisley office, as part of the Argyle and Clyde Area, is continuing to build up relations and communications with ethnic minority groups.
Members of staff have attended approximately 6 schools in the Area in the last year and jobs fairs at the SECC including one aimed at black and minority ethnic groups in June 2005. Much of this work has been done by staff out of hours.
The Paisley Office for the past few years been involved in mini-trials events organised by the Faculty of Advocates in local schools. These have been very successful and engaged both Fiscal Service staff and the children involved. Again, much of this work has been done out of hours.
A member of staff attends the multi-agency Renfrewshire Voluntary Services Group who hope to engage with all minority ethnic groups in Renfrewshire and who are looking to hold a community event in the Spring.
The Area is represented at PAREF (Public Authority Racial Equality Forum) and MARIM (Multi Agency Racial Incident Monitoring Group) at both strategic and operational level.
Networking arrangements are currently under review as the West of Scotland Racial Equality Council is in the process of attempting to set up a pan-Strathclyde multi-agency Forum, which would meet many of Paisley's networking requirements. An application for funding is presently with the Scottish Executive and discussions are taking place with criminal justice agencies. The Office is looking at how best, in this context, to take forward the whole diversity agenda.
Conclusions
Our pre inspection questionnaire returned by Paisley had been comprehensively filled in making the inspection process easier and we would record our thanks to the staff who completed it.
Although we mention a few cases where policy was not strictly adhered to (and even then, with the exception of one case, the racial element was covered) overall the Paisley Office has a high compliance with policy on the prosecution of race crime.
Outreach and consultation initiatives are kept under review and actively pursued.
[1] General Register Office for Scotland 2001 Census of Population