Read on Twitter
The decision of #Durham Police not issue a fine to Dominic #Cummings is, frankly, nothing sort of incredible @BarristerSecret (thread)
First, @PoliceChiefs have made it clear, through pronouncements on their Twitter feed, that police should have regard to legal guidance issued by the CPS. The CPS guidance on the Coronavirus regulations can be found here https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/coronavirus-health-protection-coronavirus-restrictions-england-regulations-2020
As can be seen, the guidance makes clear that breach of Regulation 6 (don’t leave your home unless you have a reasonable excuse) is not only a criminal offence, but a serious one. It then explains why.
The offence is serious because it is “related to measures imposed to prevent the spread of infection throughout the UK, and potentially high incidences of serious illness and death.”
Moreover, the Code for Crown Prosecutors makes clear - in its section on assessing the public interest - that (a) prosecution will usually take place unless the CPS is satisfied that the public interest factors tending against prosecution outweigh those tending in favour;
(b) the more serious the offence, the more likely it is that a prosecution is required; and - crucially in this case - (c) “[t]greater the impact of the offending on the community, the more likely it is that a prosecution is required.”
The relevance of this last factor to the present case is of course obvious. By driving 50 miles to Barnard Castle, Cummings has - it is agreed by almost everyone - hugely undermined the the messages being put out about social distancing by the government he works for.
So Cummings has, on his own admission, committed a serious offence which was especially serious because its commission has has a massively negative effect on the community.
Presumably, @DurhamPolice did not consult the CPS over their decision. Certainly, they did not read the CPS legal guidance I have set out above. In any event, unarguably, their decision is wholly out of kilter with it.
As for the contention that because officers would have issued only “advice” to Cummings had they stopped him on his way to Barnard Castle, this is a (presumably unintentional) diversion. He drove to Barnard Castle and then got out and sat by a river.
The question then is, what would officers have done had they come across him there, spoken to him, and then found he had driven 25 miles there for no good reason then sat by a river in the town?
In that scenario, would they have offered only “advice”? If so, why would they? And why has @DurhamPolice not addressed this question?
In conclusion, while it seems hugely unlikely Durham Police will voluntarily change their decision, it is to be hoped that they have enough in their coffers to defend themselves in a judicial review that I fear may just come their way @jezrobson @NorthernFell (end)
