Denary

I received this from the Met Police recently. The police's job is to present witness statements to the CPS. If the CPS like the look of them, they'll then review the evidence and consider prosecuting. So by improving witness statements, road traffic offences have a better change of proceeding, and I expect that extends to all police forces. Brief witness statements that say "look at the video" don't wash anymore: Reporting Road Traffic Offences to the Metropolitan Police Dear Matt, As a manager within the Metropolitan Police Public Reporting Team, I am writing to those who regularly submit reports through our service. Firstly, I would like to thank you for the time and effort you invest in reporting road traffic offences. Your submissions play an important role in helping to make London's roads safer. I am writing to ask for your assistance with an issue recently raised by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) regarding the level of detail contained within some witness statements submitted in support of road traffic offence reports. Although many reports are supported by clear video evidence, magistrates at the initial hearing stage do not routinely view that footage and instead rely primarily on the written witness statement when deciding how a case should proceed. The CPS has advised that, in some instances, statements have not contained enough detail for the court to fully understand the circumstances of the alleged offence from the written account alone. As the court process is unlikely to change, we are keen to ensure that cases are supported by the strongest possible evidence from the outset. The CPS has advised that, whilst video footage is often available, magistrates will usually rely first on the written witness statement when considering a case. We would therefore be grateful if, when completing your statement, you could provide enough detail for someone who has not seen the footage to understand exactly what happened. Please also ensure that the location of the incident is recorded accurately, including the road name and full postcode wherever possible, and that these details are checked before submission. For example, descriptions such as "close pass" or "using a mobile phone whilst driving" identify the alleged offence but may not fully explain the circumstances. It is often helpful to include: • What happened leading up to the incident. • A clear description of the driver's actions. • Why you believed an offence had been committed. • Any risk, impact or consequence created by those actions. For mobile phone offences, it can also be helpful to describe where the device was located and any interaction you observed, such as holding, typing, scrolling or speaking into it. These are simply examples based on two of the most commonly reported offences. The same principle applies to all reports: the written statement should provide a clear and detailed account of the incident so that the circumstances can be understood without reference to the video evidence alone. Whilst additional observations can be helpful, please do not place yourself in a confrontational, uncomfortable or potentially unsafe position in an attempt to obtain further evidence or information. Your safety and wellbeing should always remain the priority. I appreciate that providing this level of detail may take a little more time and effort when preparing a report. However, it can make a significant difference to how a case is assessed by the CPS and the courts, and ultimately improve the likelihood of a successful outcome. Thank you once again for your continued support and for the significant contribution you make to improving road safety across London. These recommendations have been introduced in response to feedback from the CPS and are intended to maximise the prospects of successful prosecutions. Your assistance in adopting them in future submissions is greatly appreciated. Kind regards, [REDACTED] @roadcc - use as appropriate