Advanced Search

Decision to Charge

Once the Police have completed their investigations, they will refer the case to the Crown Prosecution Service for advice on how to proceed. We will then make a decision on whether a suspect should be charged, and what that charge should be.

Find out more about how we decide whether to charge a suspect

Find out more about private prosecutions

Prosecuting Homicide

Murder and manslaughter are two of the offences that constitute homicide.

Manslaughter can be committed in one of three ways:

  1. killing with the intent for murder but where there is provocation, diminished responsibility or a suicide pact.
  2. conduct that was grossly negligent given the risk of death, and resulted in death.
  3. conduct, taking the form of an unlawful act involving a danger of some harm, that caused death.

With some exceptions, the crime of murder is committed, where a person:

  • of sound mind and discretion (i.e. sane):
  • unlawfully kills (i.e. not self-defence or other justified killing)
  • any reasonable creature (human being)
  • in being (born alive and breathing through its own lungs)
  • under the Queen's Peace
  • with intent to kill or cause grievous bodily harm.

There are other specific homicide offences, for example, infanticide, causing death by dangerous driving, and corporate manslaughter.

Find out more about prosecuting homicide

Home » News Centre » Press Releases » CPS advise on Stephen Lawrence re-investigation

CPS advise on Stephen Lawrence re-investigation

05/05/2004

The Crown Prosecution Service has today advised officers from the Metropolitan Police Service that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute anyone for the murder of Stephen Lawrence and the attack on Duwayne Brooks following a re-investigation into the crime.

A special casework lawyer from CPS London has thoroughly reviewed all the evidence in the case. This has included evidence gathered by police during the re-investigation, papers from the private prosecution and papers from the inquest. All the evidence from the previous investigations has also been studied to identify any statements or other evidence relevant to this review.

The CPS sought advice from senior counsel who reviewed the same material and has independently come to the same conclusion as the reviewing lawyer.

In its advice to the police the CPS made the following points:

  • The re-investigation did produce an eye witness who had not previously come forward but their evidence did not provide reliable identification of any individual in relation to the attack. Taken as a whole, the material reviewed by the CPS does not provide any clear, credible identification evidence from any witness.
  • There is no credible forensic evidence which places any specific individual at the scene of the murder.
  • A number of accounts of alleged confessions have also been investigated but almost all have proved to be second hand hearsay and unverifiable and therefore not admissible. None are sufficient to support a prosecution.

Claire Ward, CPS London Special Casework Lawyer, said:

"We must apply the clear objective test, as set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors, when looking at the evidence in every case and advising on prosecution: that is we must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction against a defendant. To do that the evidence has to be admissible and believable.

"We have conducted a very thorough review of every item of evidence relevant to this case to establish whether it would be admissible in court and would support a prosecution. I have also had the benefit of looking through the papers from the private prosecution for which I am very grateful to Mr and Mrs Lawrence. The police have carried out a very thorough re-investigation: investigating officers have followed up all additional questions senior counsel and I have put to them, provided extra material as we've requested it and conducted further investigation wherever we have suggested it. However, despite this, there is no reliable, admissible evidence which places any identifiable suspect at the murder scene at the time it took place.

"The sheer volume of evidence and other material relevant to the case and the importance of ensuring that the review was exhaustive has meant that it has been a lengthy process but one that we have been mindful to carry out carefully and meticulously."

The Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC, said:

"I realise that Mr and Mrs Lawrence and Duwayne Brooks will have hoped for a different conclusion to the review so that someone could be prosecuted for the terrible crime that happened. Our policy is to prosecute racist crimes firmly and robustly wherever the evidence allows and we are fully committed to that principle. We all need to reflect on this dreadful murder and recognise the profound effect it has had on our national consciousness. However, no matter how important or serious a case is, if on the strength of the evidence it does not pass the test that we apply, it must not go ahead. That is the position in this case."

Doreen and Neville Lawrence and Duwayne Brooks were given a detailed explanation of the advice to police by the reviewing lawyer at meetings this morning. Chief Crown Prosecutor for London, Dru Sharpling and Director of Public Prosecutions, Ken Macdonald QC and officers from the Metropolitan Police also attended the meeting.

Media enquiries to CPS Press Office on 020 7710 6091.