Clause 65 - New and compelling evidence
Criminal Justice Bill
11:15 am
Mr Simon Hughes (North Southwark and Bermondsey, Liberal Democrat)
I want to make two points. First, I support the hon. Gentleman's amendment. For the reasons that have been set out, we would do well to tighten the definition, and that is the purpose of amendment No. 331. The clause is drafted in such a way that it would include evidence that was available but unknown to the officer or the prosecutor. It opens the door to incompetence and a lack of due diligence—I can see no other interpretation.
Secondly, the test must be whether the evidence was there, not whether someone found it or failed to go down the relevant route of inquiry. However we resolve the issue of double jeopardy, I would have considerable concerns if trials could be restarted just because the prosecutor, the Director of Public Prosecutions, the CPS or the police happened not to know of the evidence, even though it was available. The issue must be the availability of the evidence, not the knowledge of the individual officer or prosecutor.