7 July 2025.
Dear Dame Vera Baird,
7th July 2025
Dear Dame Vera Baird,
I congratulate you on your recent, appointment, as interim chairwoman of the CCRC.
I am not sure what your directive is, but my own personal experience of dealing with the CCRC, over many years, may afford you some opportunity of understanding, why I believe the CCRC has failed many, in its very purpose of existence. As you and the general public are fully aware, through high profile media coverage, the CCRC continue to endure public criticisms, when cases are successful at the court of appeal, despite previously being turned down by the CCRC as ‘without merit,’ usually years earlier.
In my experience, there are specific, common problems, which significantly cause, the failure of CCRC cases, to expedite and correctly be reviewed, with diligence. Where the appellant is convinced the CCRC decision is wrong, especially if they have researched the law themselves, this will inevitably cause, them to re apply to the CCRC. Clogging up the system of reviews even further.
All the CCRC then do, is to put an order in place, which states you will not look at any further applications, unless submitted by a solicitor. They would of course be expected to have considered if there is any ‘merit’ in the application. But without a solicitor, the appellant may still be determined that years later they are still pursuing their right of appeal in one way or another.
Three specific problems associated with CCRC case reviews.
1. Targets and Time limits set on determining and completing cases.
2. Insufficient legally qualified professionals, who can accurately and without pressure, consider cases diligently.
3. An inability of appellants to afford, or obtain legal advice (legal aid) before applying to the CCRC for a case review. This basic inability of a convicted person, to obtain legal opinion on any case of ‘merit’ is frustrating for the applicant.
The Court of Appeal has previously ruled, that any material, which can assist the defence case, and which lessens the prosecution case, must be disclosed. In my case, the CCRC decided that the Court of Appeal ruling didn’t apply. That decision by the CCRC is extraordinary. To me that application (not this current re application) was obviously never considered properly.
I understand Criminal defence law states, very clearly, where not guilty pleas are anticipated or have been entered in a court of Law, secondary disclosure must be made by the prosecution.
I hope you may find some of this helpful.
Sincerely
Ian Crosby.