The Betrayal

Accountability
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) had an opportunity to assert its independence in practice over miscarriage of justice cases. The principles applied in several cases in different locations. It is responsible for ensuring that only prosecutions that are appropriate for trial get to that stage. It has the discretion to refuse to prosecute or it can demand that the police conduct further research and gather more evidence.

It has to be aware of lines of inquiry that could undermine the prosecution case, such as alibi, but too often it exploits the obligation to its advantage. Yusef Abdullahi had a strong alibi. The CPS knew it was even stronger and withheld that knowledge from his defence and the court. This should not be tolerated. Testing the truthfulness of an alibi is one thing, but deceiving a jury and court can never be acceptable. Either the CPS did that or failed to rein its lead QC, when it knew or should have known of the deception.

The possibility – a glaringly obvious one – that the alibi was true and that this was an inappropriate prosecution appears to have escaped it and its Crown Prosecutor.