OFFICE INSPECTION - STIRLING
21 & 22 FEBRUARY 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 Stirling. The Stirling office is part of the Central 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 of 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 (ie 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 (eg 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 Annex 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. 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.
In Stirling, a member of legal staff decides what course of action to take in each case. The Area Procurator Fiscal checks these cases for compliance with Departmental policy and will refer instances of non-compliance back to the District PF for action to be taken.
Table 1 - Racial Charges and Racial Aggravations reported to Stirling Fiscal Office, 2003-04 and 2004-05
| 2003-04 | 2004-05 |
Section 50A(1) (a) charges | 1 | 9 |
Section 50A(1) (b) charges | 53 | 96 |
Section 96 aggravations | 5 | 34 |
The data extracted from the National Database revealed that in respect of the Stirling office, in financial year (FY) 2003-04:
1 Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
53 Section 50A(1) (b) charges were reported
5 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them were reported
And in FY 2004-05:
9 Section 50A(1) (a) charges were reported
96 Section 50A(1) (b) charges were reported
34 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 means that the number of case papers requested is lower than the number of individual charges selected.
Please also be aware that a single case may contain one or more charges selected as part of the risk-assessed sample and one or more charges selected as part of the general sample.
The General Sample
A sample of 49 Section 50A charges (35 cases) and 16 charges (9 cases) with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them was drawn. Resulting from the 'general sample', therefore, a total of 44 case papers (65 charges) were subsequently requested for inspection.
In respect of the sample of 49 Section 50A charges the office was unable to find 3 cases (containing 5 charges). Of the remaining 44 charges (32 cases) we found that 3 charges were duplicates bringing the number of charges for inspection down to 41 (albeit still 32 cases). We found that marking policy had been complied with in all cases. Of the 16 cases taken to court (containing 22 charges), we found compliance with policy in respect of conduct during court proceedings in all cases.
In respect of the sample of 16 charges with Section 96 aggravations recorded against them, we found that marking policy was complied with in all instances. All 9 cases were taken to court and we found compliance with policy in respect of court proceedings in all but one case (one charge) where a plea of 'not guilty' had been accepted despite apparent evidence to support the charge. There was no indication of why this had been done.
The Risk-Assessed Sample
A total of 18 charges (13 cases) were selected for inspection. Of these 13 cases 5 also contained charges that were selected as part of the general sample. Two cases could not be found - one of these also contained charges for the general sample (as was mentioned in the preceding section).
The charges selected for inspection consisted of:
9 charges recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', reported in FY 2004-05
3 charges contained within 2 cases which were recorded as being 'deserted simpliciter' (case abandoned with no possibility of being taken up in the future), reported in FY 2004-05
One charge which was recorded as being unmarked, reported in FY 2004-05
5 charges with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against them, recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings', reported in FY 2004-05
In respect of the 18 charges (13 case papers) that were automatically selected (as detailed above) we found that:
Of the 9 charges recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings':
In respect of one charge, the police had reported a vandalism charge as a Section 50A charge due to the nature of the graffiti. The decision was taken however to proceed with a vandalism only charge apparently due to a lack of evidence to support the Section 50A charge.
In respect of 2 charges (one case), we found that the correct marking decision was made in both instances. The case itself was a difficult and labour intensive roll up. There were 6 cases, 8 eventual charges and 6 accused (initially) targeting 2 business premises at different times and in different combinations. The 2 Section 50A charges which were marked for no proceedings were correctly marked - one because it was not a Section 50A but a breach of bail conditions - a contravention of Section 27 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. The other charge concerned 2 suspects who were correctly not proceeded against as they had nothing to do with the offence - however the correct 2 offenders were later identified and prosecuted. The main offender initially got bail with special conditions attached but as this was breached he was eventually remanded in custody. The Police also identified preceding cases in all subsequent reports which made the job of the marking Depute easier. This case was an example of very good practice.
In respect of another charge, there was insufficient evidence to support the police charge and hence the marking decision was correct
In respect of another charge, the correct decision was made to mark for no proceedings in respect of the Section 50A charge - a breach of the peace charge with a Section 96 aggravation attached was correctly taken up instead.
In respect of another charge, the marking decision of no proceedings was also correct - the Police incorrectly identified a Section 50A charge when there was no evidence to suggest the incident was racial
In respect of another charge, the marking decision was also correctly taken - there was only one source of evidence.
Of the 3 charges recorded as being 'deserted simpliciter':
Of the charge recorded as being unmarked:
Of the 5 charges with a Section 96 aggravation recorded against them, recorded as being marked for 'no proceedings':
In respect of another charge, the correct decision was also taken to take no proceedings - this case is linked to the roll-up case, detailed earlier in this section
In respect of another charge, we found that the case was deserted 'pro loco et tempore' (deserted meantime but with the possibility that it may be taken up at some point in the future) at the second trial date due to witness problems.
General Comments
Generally in all but one case (referred to above where a plea of not guilty to a charge of racially aggravated assault was accepted) we found there to be compliance with Crown Office policy both at the marking stage of the cases and throughout court proceedings. One particular example of good practice was the "roll up" of 6 cases previously referred to involving 6 accused where it appeared throughout that two particular business premises were being targeted by the accused. It was also apparent that the Area Procurator Fiscal was frequently consulted by marking Deputes for approval of a decision to mark a case "no proceedings".
The Stirling Office has had a number of racist cases reported by the Police where the accused where under the age of 16. These cases were referred appropriately to the Children's Reporter and all of the cases appeared to have been marked by the Principal Depute.
There were a number of cases where the Police had charged a section 50A (1)(b) offence where there was clearly insufficient evidence to proceed with this charge and which were ultimately marked "no proceedings" by the marking Depute in consultation with the Area Procurator Fiscal. It also appeared that a list of such cases was being maintained for discussion with the Police Chief Inspector.
In one case which proceeded to trial at court the Sheriff acquitted an accused of a section 50 A(1)(b) charge on a point of law. Crown Counsel's opinion was sought with a view to possibly appealing the decision of the Sheriff. It transpired that Crown Counsel did not support an appeal. However, the point of law was tested in a subsequent case.
Monitoring of Race Crime
The formal monitoring exercise is undertaken by the Area Procurator Fiscal for Central Area. This is done by reference to the monitoring forms completed by the legal staff together with copy case papers and where necessary the principal papers are requested. In relation to compliance with the Lord Advocate's Guidelines at the Initial Case Processing stage, the copy case is almost invariably read. In relation to Police compliance with the Guidelines, feedback is provided to the Chief Inspector with responsibility for Diversity issues within Central Scotland Police and at Divisional level. A copy of the letter sent by the Area Procurator Fiscal to the Chief Inspector in relation to the last monitoring exercise was provided.
In order to ensure that all race cases are monitored in compliance with Crown Office race policy the following process was followed: the monitoring form` A` is completed by the marking Depute and passed to the Area Personal Assistant. A manual search of the PROMIS (ie IT) system is carried out at the end of each month to ensure that all monitoring forms have been received. Outstanding forms are requested from District Offices. Cases are tracked to their conclusion and if the monitoring form` B` is not received this is then requested from District Offices. Forms` A and B` are reviewed by the Area Procurator Fiscal. Forms `A and B`are standard departmental monitoring forms.
On the basis of the results of monitoring and discussions with Legal Managers, the Area Procurator Fiscal is satisfied that COPFS staff comply with Crown Office race policy and it has not been necessary to feedback in respect of non-compliance. The type of feedback provided to staff would depend on the nature of the issue identified.
The process for ingathering information required by the Crown Office Legal and Policy Forum is that the legal staff complete the monitoring forms and returns are made by the Area Procurator Fiscal/Area Personal Assistant for the Legal and Policy Forum.
Additional to the required monitoring in January 2006 a separate qualitative exercise was undertaken to examine outcomes in relation to a small sample of cases. The information was then provided to the Central Scotland Lay Advisory Group (a copy of the report was provided to us) and it is intended that this exercise would be repeated on at least a quarterly basis.
Interpreters
Only two of the cases which we inspected required interpreting services, and these had been met.
The Stirling office operates with three teams: Initial Case Processing, Summary Team and Solemn Team. Legal members of staff note requirements for interpretation services on case papers and an administrative member of staff contacts Alpha Interpreting Services to request an interpreter.
There were 19 requests for an interpreter in the last year (1 January 2005 to 31 December 2005). There were no known problems with the use of interpreters.
Interpreters complete their part (Section One) of the Interpreters Monitoring Form and this is sent to the office with the invoice for services provided. Forms are then passed to the Area PA for forwarding to the Area Procurator Fiscal for monitoring. In common with many offices the legal member of staff who took the case in Court does not regularly fill in Section Two of the monitoring forms.
Deaths
There were no deaths reported in Stirling 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 the Police which are of a criminal nature and the Inspectorate seeks to monitor those which have a minority ethnic dimension.
Six such cases were identified and examined by us. All seemed to have been investigated properly and in two cases Crown Counsel's instructions were obtained by the Area Procurator Fiscal.
Employment
Latest data [1] shows that 98.5 per cent of the population in the Stirling Sheriff Court District area is from a white background. Other ethnic groups, of which Chinese, Pakistani and 'any mixed background' are the largest (all around 0.3 per cent), account for the remaining 1.5 per cent.
As at 1 January 2006, Stirling had a staff of 31, consisting of:
Legal staff
Administrative staff
2 Precognition Officers
1 Band E staff
2 Band D staff
1 Band C staff
2 Personal Assistants
11 Band B staff
1 Band A staff
Casual staff
Small numbers (less than 5) prevent disclosure of the exact number of staff who are from a minority ethnic background (as self-reported to Human Resources Division in COPFS via survey) in the Stirling office. However, we concluded that minority ethnic representation in the office was in line with minority ethnic representation in the local population.
Band B vacancies are advertised in the Stirling local press and Job Centre Plus. Copies of such adverts are issued to Central Scotland Racial Equality Council to circulate to contacts within the minority ethnic communities.
Diversity Awareness
As at 1 June 2005, 79 per cent of staff in the Stirling office had attended the Departmental Diversity Awareness Programme. All relevant others have re-scheduled to attend at a later date.
One member of staff has been very involved in race training including attended the University of Paisley course on Professional Practice on Race Equality. This staff member has also attended a workshop on 'Preventing and Responding to Racist Incidents' and an 'Understanding Islam' awareness day. A further workshop on Race, Religion and Cultural Awareness is planned for later in the year.
Consultation
The area has established a Multi Agency Race Group which is chaired by the Area Procurator Fiscal. On this Group are representatives from COPFS (including VIA), Central Scotland Police, Scottish Court Service, Victim Support Scotland, Central Scotland Racial Equality Council and the Reporter to the Children's Panel. The Area Procurator Fiscal is also a member of the Central Scotland Police Lay Advisors' Group which is a forum for obtaining views from representatives of local minority groups.
The Area Procurator Fiscal also attends the Central Scotland Racial Equality Council AGM.
The Area Business Manager is the area representative of the Forth Valley RAHMAS (Racist Attacks Harassment Multi Agency Strategy Group). In addition to his membership of the main Group he is also a member of a number of sub-groups.
Community Wardens employed by the local authority are also being trained and advised about what the Procurator Fiscal can do to make it easier for business people to come to court. A similar operation exists in the Falkirk area and events are planned for Stirling in March 2006 and later in Falkirk.
The Police have a Lay Advisory Group consisting entirely of representatives from the minority ethnic communities.
In addition the area has the benefit of a combined Victim Support/Central Scotland Police outreach initiative in the form of an Outreach Worker who is from an ethnic minority based at Falkirk Police Office who we understand produces many projects and initiatives including school visits and in particular provides good feedback to the Procurator Fiscal in ongoing cases. She is also on the Race Resource Group and a useful source of information etc.
The Area Fiscal informed us that she finds attendance at local groups invaluable in establishing good relations with criminal justice partners and the voluntary sector as well as with representatives of minority communities. This has provided opportunities to explain to lay representatives the working of the criminal justice system and the role of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. She feels no doubt correctly that this has promoted a better understanding of the system as a whole and that contact with representatives of minority groups has provided opportunities to meet with the wider community and to promote confidence in the criminal justice system and in particular the role played by the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service. As a result of these contacts numerous invitations to various minority ethnic events have been received and accepted.
In particular together with a Central Scotland Police Officer and an ethnic minority worker the Area Procurator Fiscal visited two victims who had been subjected to ongoing racist abuse to discuss the effects of repeat victimisation and to provide reassurance of the Procurator Fiscal's commitment to dealing robustly with race crime and also to obtain a better understanding of the victim issues. As a result of this contact one of the victims contributed to local training of the Procurator Fiscal staff.
In particular the Area Fiscal and District Fiscal have, on separate occasions, visited the women's group associated with the Stirling Mosque and the local Chinese community. The Area Fiscal has spoken at a meeting of the local Chinese association on the role of the Procurator Fiscal and she has also spoken at the local Mosque.
Conclusions
Stirling has a very high compliance with the policy on the prosecution of race crime and as we mentioned in our report there were examples of good practice.
So far as monitoring is concerned the Area Fiscal sees all the race cases and can be reasonably confident that none slip through the net as her PA ensures that all race cases are referred to her. As we highlight in our report she undertook a separate qualitative analysis in relation to a small sample of race cases in addition to the normal monitoring requirements.
In particular on the consultation front the Stirling office has been proactive in maintaining and creating links with the local community.
[1] General Register Office for Scotland 2001 Census of Population