He referred to a case reported on 16th April involving an attack on Colin Craythorne by Carl Bromley, who was sentenced to 120 days in prison by Mansfield Magistrates on 8th April, for the attack.

Mr McLean is under the impression that the Crown Prosecution Service reduced the charge of grievous bodily harm to a charge of common assault.

This is inaccurate. Mr Bromley was charged from the outset with the offence of common assault and the charge was not downgraded.

When considering charge prosecutors must select charges which are supported by the evidence and which reflect the seriousness and extent of the offending and give the court adequate powers to sentence.

Common assault carries a maximum sentence of six months imprisonment. Medical evidence regarding the extent of the injuries is often a key factor in determining the appropriate level of charge and indeed such evidence was considered in this case.

Mr McLean further states that if the Crown Prosecution Service do not have an 80% chance of securing a conviction they opt for a lesser charge to avoid a trial. This is incorrect. In deciding whether to charge prosecutors must be satisfied that there is enough evidence to provide a "realistic prospect of conviction".

This means that a jury or bench of magistrates is more likely than not to convict on the charge alleged. This is a separate test from the one the criminal courts apply, as they should only convict if they are sure of a defendant's guilt.

I hope this clarifies the misleading impression given in Mr McLean's letter.

JUDITH WALKER,
Chief Crown Prosecutor,
Crown Prosecution Service,
Nottinghamshire.