There are several examples of cases that should not have been brought and even some that should have been prosecuted, but both affect the claims of the CPS to be independent of the police. It has take to take responsibility for all decisions regarding whether to prosecute or not and it will be judged by its failures, especially the high profile ones. If success is measured by results then its handling of the Rolan Adams case will be seen as a success, even though serious flaws have been identified, because it secured convictions, but is it a success. Richard Adams feels betrayed by a system that should have protected his interests and brought Nathan into conflict with the system as well, because police and CPS were determined to deny the racist motivation of that crime. Brian Moore remains convicted of violent disorder while the man who organised the attack on him and his friends isn't because the police and CPS undermined witnesses by prosecuting them, while ignoring laws that demanded the prosecution of the attackers. The CPS has never explained how and why it came to make these seemingly inexplicable decisions, but what about cases that have been proven to be miscarriages of justice?

It is now well known that the Cardiff Five – Yusef Abdullahi, John and Ronnie Actie, Stephen Miller and Tony Paris twice stood trial for a crime that they did not commit. Lynette White was the victim of what was then the most horrendous knife crime in Welsh history – Jeffrey Gafoor inflicted over fifty wounds on the young woman including to her throat. It was an appalling crime and Gafoor left traces of himself in the flat that eventually tied him to his crime and also proved the innocence of the five men who stood trial, but does this mean that the Cardiff Five should never have stood trial with the benefit of hindsight, or was there never enough evidence to justify prosecutions and if so, is this the only case where that applies?