8 STATISTICS

Explanatory Note in Relation to Statistics

8.1    The statistics outlined in this report have been compiled from data taken from our IT systems which are primarily used as a case tracking system and were not designed for the primary purpose of generating statistics. The systems are subject to ongoing development in order to enhance the quality of the data produced.

8.2    This chapter is broken down into three distinct sections:

• Charts 1 to 6 relate to the receipt of files in the Office and include details on the types of directions made;
• Charts 7 to 11 provide details of the results of cases prosecuted on indictment by the Director in respect of files received in the Office between 2004 and 2006;
• Charts 12 to 14 provide statistics on Office expenditure.

8.3    All the yearly demarcations in the statistical tables refer to the year the file was received in the Office. The reason for going back so far in charts 7 to 11 is to take account of the time difference between a direction being made and a trial verdict being recorded. If statistics were to be provided in respect of 2007 case outcomes, a large proportion of the cases would still be classified as ‘for hearing’ and the statistics would have little value. Cases heard within a short period of being brought are not necessarily representative.

8.4    In this report we have attempted in most instances to include updated versions of the data set out in previous Annual Reports in order to give a fuller account of the progress made since that data was previously published. Because of the continuous change in the status of cases - for example, a case which was pending at the time of a previous report may now have concluded - information given in this report will differ from that for the same cohort of cases in previous reports. In addition, data from two different years may not be strictly comparable because as time goes on more cases are completed so that information from earlier years is necessarily more complete than that from later years. Unless otherwise stated, data included in these statistics was updated in April 2008.

8.5    Caution should be exercised when considering these statistics in the light of statistics published by other organisations such as the Courts Service or An Garda Síochána. The statistics published here are based on our own classification and categorisation systems and may in some cases not be in line with the classification systems of other organisations.

Chart 1 shows the total number of files received by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions from 1976 to 2007.

The vast majority of files received in the Office relate to the prosecution of criminal cases. The remainder deal with general queries, applications for judicial review or requests for legal advice from the Garda Síochána or local state solicitors. The number of files received, and the complexity of the issues that have to be addressed, has increased generally since the establishment of the Office.

The significant drop of over 1,000 files from 2000 to 2001 was the result of a change in administrative arrangements authorising the prosecution of certain offences by the Garda Síochána without the necessity for the prior submission of files to this Office for directions. The sharp increase in figures from 2001 to 2002 is due to the transfer of the Criminal Division of the Chief State Solicitor’s Office to the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions in December 2001 to form the Solicitors Division of the Office.

Chart 1 TOTAL FILES RECEIVED

Total Files Received

The Solicitors Division of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions provides a solicitor service to the Director and acts on his behalf. the division also deals with cases which do not require to be referred to the Directing Division for direction.

Chart 2 represents the number of cases dealt with solely within the Solicitors Division and includes District Court prosecution files, appeals from the District Court to the Circuit Court and High Court Bail applications. the figure for District Court Appeals represents the number of files held, not the number of individual charges appealed. One defendant may have a multiplicity of charges under appeal.

The Solicitors Division also deals with judicial review applications. While some of these applications are dealt with solely within the Solicitors Division, others require to be forwarded to the Directing Division for direction. However, because the dedicated Judicial Review Section is based in the Solicitors Division the total number of judicial review applications dealt with are included in this chart. those applications which required a direction are also included in the figures for the Directing Division (Chart 3) under the category ‘other legal files'. Judicial reviews may be taken by the Director or be taken against him.

Chart 2 FILES DEALT WITH BY SOLICITORS DIVISION

Chart 3 compares the number of files received in the Directing Division to the number of suspects who are the subject of those files. Many files relate to more than one suspect and to treat such a file as a single case can give a misleading impression of the workload of the Office. It is important, therefore, to look at the total number of suspects as well as the total number of files.

NOTE: There are also a number of files received in the Directing Division each year not relating to prosecutions. These include requests for legal advice from the Garda Síochána and local state solicitors, and judicial review applications received from the Solicitors Division for direction.These files are outlined in the chart as 'other legal files'.

Chart 3 BREAKDOWN OF FILES RECEIVED IN DIRECTING DIVISION

The following chart shows a breakdown of the disposal of files received in the Directing Division in 2005, 2006 and 2007 (as of April 2008). The Garda Síochána and specialised investigating agencies submit files either directly to our Solicitors Division or to the local state solicitor for a direction whether or not to prosecute. Depending on the seriousness of the offence and the evidence disclosed in the file, a decision will be taken as follows:

No Prosecution: A decision not to prosecute is made. The most common reason not to prosecute is because the evidence contained in the file is not sufficient to support a prosecution. The figures however list all decisions not to prosecute.

Prosecute on Indictment: It is decided to prosecute in the Circuit, Central or Special Criminal Courts.

Summary Disposal: The offence is to be prosecuted in the District Court.

Under Consideration: Files in which a decision has not been made. This figure includes those files in which further information or investigation was required before a decision could be made. Further information is sought more often than not to strengthen the case rather than because of any deficiency in the investigation.

NOTE: The figures for 2005 and 2006 have been updated since the publication of previous Annual Reports. The reduction in the files 'Under Consideration' figures compared with those given in previous years reflect developments on those files since then. 'Prosecutions on Indictment' include those cases in which defendants elected for trial by jury and cases where the judge of the District Court refused jurisdiction, even though the Director initially elected for summary disposal.

Chart 4 DISPOSAL OF DIRECTING DIVISION FILES BY NUMBER OF SUSPECTS SUBJECT OF FILES RECEIVED

A decision may be made not to prosecute in relation to a particular file for a variety of reasons other than the main reasons set out in this chart (referred to as 'other' below). The death or disappearance of the suspect, the death or disappearance of the complainant or the refusal of a complainant to give evidence are some examples.

Chart 4a BREAKDOWN OF MAIN REASONS FOR A DIRECTION NOT TO PROSECUTE

Chart 4b is a breakdown of directions to prosecute on indictment, by the county in which the offence was committed. It includes cases directed to be heard in the Circuit Criminal, Central Criminal and Special Criminal Courts. Please note that a number of cases are still 'Under Consideration' (see Chart 4). These include cases where a file was received but further information was required. It is not possible to determine how many of these cases may eventually result in a direction to prosecute on indictment.

Chart 4b BREAKDOWN OF NUMBER OF PROSECUTIONS ON INDICTMENT DIRECTED PER COUNTY OF OFFENCE

*Population figures for 2006 are taken from the census figures for that year. Population figures for years preceding 2006 are calculated based on the proration of the Population & Migration Estimates for the Regional Authority Areas as published by the Central Statistics Office in April 2006 which includes revised yearly figures for the years between 2003 and 2005. The 2007 figures are based on a proration of the estimated 2007 population figures as published in the Population and Migration Estimates issued in December 2007.

Chart 5 shows the time between the receipt of a completed prosecution filein the Office and the issuing of a direction as to whether a prosecution of a suspect should be taken or not. It has been decided to show this information by suspect rather than by filesince in the case of filescontaining multiple suspects, decisions in respect of all suspects may not be made at the same time.

Files vary in size and complexity. Also,in some cases, further information or investigation was required before a decision could be made. Further information may be sought to enhance the proofs in a case and does not necessarily imply any deficiency in the investigation.

The time taken to issue directions is calculated on the basis of only those fileswhich have been disposed of. Files still under consideration are therefore shown as a separate category in the table below.

Chart 5 TIME TAKEN TO ISSUE DIRECTIONS

Section 2 of the Criminal Justice Act, 1993 provides that the Director of Public Prosecutions may apply to the Court of Criminal Appeal to have a sentence imposed by the trial court reviewed, if it appears that the sentence imposed was in law unduly lenient.

Chart 6 below details the number of applications made since the introduction of the Act.

In Annual Reports prior to 2004 the results of applications made were set out according to the year in which they were lodged. However not all applications lodged in the year for which the Annual Report was reporting were heard by the date of publication of the Annual Report and the results for such applications were listed as pending. It was therefore decided, from the year 2003 onwards, to set out the results of applications according to the year in which they were heard.

Chart 6a below outlines the results of applications, from the years 1994 to 2002, by the year in which the application was lodged (as appeared in previous Annual Reports).

Chart 6b outlines the results of applications, from the year 2003 onwards, by the year in which the application was heard.

Chart 6 APPLICATIONS FOR REVIEW OF SENTENCE ON GROUNDS OF UNDUE LENIENCY

Number of Applications Lodged

Chart 6a RESULTS OF APPLICATIONS BY YEAR LODGED

Chart 6b RES ULTS OF APPLICATIONS BY YEAR HEARD

Outcomes of Prosecutions Taken on Indictment

Charts 7 to 11 provide information for prosecutions on indictment taken by the Director in respect of files received in the Office between 2004 and 2006. As referred to in the initial explanatory note, care should be taken before a comparison is made with figures provided by any other organisation, as they are likely to be compiled on a different basis.

The figures in these charts relate to individual suspects against whom a direction has been made to prosecute on indictment. Statistics are provided on a suspect-by-suspect basis rather than on the basis of files received. This is because directions are made in respect of each suspect included within a file rather than against the complete file as an entity in itself. Depending on the evidence provided, different directions are often made in respect of the individual suspects received as part of the same file. References in these charts to 'cases' refer to such prosecutions taken against individual suspects. Although individual suspects on a file may be tried together where a direction is made to prosecute them in courts of equal jurisdiction, each suspect’s verdict will be collated separately for the purpose of these statistics.

Statistics are provided on the basis of one outcome per suspect; this is irrespective of the number of charges that the suspect may have been prosecuted for in respect of that file. Where a suspect is convicted on any charge, he will be categorised as ‘convicted’ regardless of whether the conviction is in respect of the main charge or for a lesser charge or charges on the indictment. Where a suspect is categorised as 'acquitted', this means that the suspect has been acquitted of all charges. In respect of cases heard in the Central Criminal Court for rape and murder, a further breakdown is given in respect of convictions for a lesser offence (e.g. manslaughter instead of murder). This information is not available within our computer systems in respect of the other courts so care should be taken in interpreting their statistics. Suspects tried before these courts are categorised on the basis of the most serious offence they are charged with, but the offence or offences they are convicted for may be different from that under which they are categorised in the charts.

It should also be noted that statistics set out in these charts relate to what happened in the trial court only and not in a subsequent appeal court. In other words where a person is convicted and the conviction is subsequently overturned on appeal, the outcome of the trial is still shown in our statistics as a conviction. Care should be taken in relation to interpreting the rates of conviction and acquittal in respect of later years, as a higher number of cases will not have reached a conclusion. The picture furnished by these statistics will be less complete and therefore less representative than those in respect of earlier years. Cases heard relatively early may not necessarily be a representative sample of the whole.

Chart 7 shows the results of prosecutions on indictment taken in relation to defendants in respect of whom prosecutions were commenced in the years 2004 to 2006 (as of April 2008). The figures relate to:

Conviction: A conviction was obtained in respect of at least one of the charges brought in the case.

Acquittal: The defendant was acquitted on all charges.

Not Yet Heard: These are cases in which a decision to prosecute has been taken and the matter is before the courts.

NOTE: Figures have not been included for 2007 as the great majority of these cases have yet to be dealt with by the courts and the outcomes for the few cases where results are available may not be representative of the final picture covering all the cases.

Chart 7 CASE RESULTS - PROSECUTIONS ON INDICTMENT

Chart 7a BREAKDOWN OF CONVICTIONS AND ACQUITTALS (EXCLUDING CASES STILL TO BE HEARD)

Chart 8 breaks down the prosecutions directed on indictment to be heard in the Circuit Court. The cases categorised as 'For Hearing' are those for which a verdict has not yet been recorded. In some of these cases, a trial may have begun but proceedings have been halted by a Judicial Review application. In other cases the defendant may have absconded before the trial and a bench warrant and/or extradition proceedings may be in process. Other cases, especially those of a complex nature, may not yet have come to trial. The greater proportion of cases 'For Hearing' makes the figures in more recent years less representative. This provision is also applicable to Charts 9 - 11. Where a trial results in a disagreement the case is treated as still being 'For Hearing' unless a nolle prosequi is entered.

Chart 8 OUTCOMES OF CASES PROSECUTED IN THE CIRCUIT CRIMINAL COURT

Chart 8a BREAKDOWN OF ‘OTHER DISPOSALS’ FROM CHART 8

Chart 8b TOTAL CASES FINALISED AND PERCENTAGE OF CONVICTIONS

Chart 9 outlines the result of cases directed for prosecution in the Special Criminal Court.

Chart 9 OUTCOMES OF CASES PROSECUTED ON INDICTMENT IN THE SPECIAL CRIMINAL COURT

Chart 9a BREAKDOWN OF ‘CONVICTIONS ON LESSER CHARGE’ FOR PERSONS CHARGED WITH MEMBERSHIP OF UNLAWFUL ORGANISATION AND RELATED OFFENCES

Chart 9b TOTAL CASES FINALISED AND PERCENTAGE OF CONVICTIONS

Chart 10 outlines the result of cases directed for prosecution in the Central Criminal Court and breaks down all cases by the most serious charge directed against the defendant. Supplementary charts break down the 'convictions on a lesser charge' and the 'other disposals' outcomes.

Chart 10 OUTCOMES OF CASES PROSECUTED ON INDICTMENT IN THE CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT

Chart 10a BREAKDOWN OF 'CONVICTIONS ON LESSER CHARGE' FOR CASES CATEGORISED AS MURDER OR ATTEMPTED MURDER

Chart 10b BREAKDOWN OF ‘CONVICTIONS ON LESSER CHARGE’ FOR CASES CATEGORISED AS RAPE OR ATTEMPTED RAPE

Chart 10c BREAKDOWN OF 'OTHER DISPOSALS'

Chart 10d TOTAL CASES FINALISED AND PERCENTAGE OF CONVICTIONS (INCLUDING CONVICTIONS ON A LESSER CHARGE)

Chart 11 breaks down the case verdicts for each circuit criminal court. Unlike Chart 8, it does not include cases 'for hearing' or cases where the outcome is other than conviction or acquittal. Please note that in some cases, a trial may be held in a circuit court for a county other than that in which the offence was committed.

Chart 11 OUTCOMES OF CASES PROSECUTED ON INDICTMENT IN THE CIRCUIT CRIMINAL COURT BY COUNTY

Chart 11a TOTAL CASES FINALISED AND PERCENTAGE OF CONVICTIONS

Chart 12 shows the breakdown of office expenditure for 2007, 2006 & 2005.

Salaries & Wages: This represents the cost of salaries of staff employed in the Office. The total staff complement at 1 January 2007 was 174.09.

Office Expenses: This relates to general office administration costs e.g. purchase and maintenance of office equipment, office supplies, library costs, office premises maintenance, travel and other incidental expenses.

Fees to Counsel: These are fees paid to the barristers who prosecute cases on behalf of the Director in the various criminal courts. Fees are set within the parameters set by the Minister for Finance.

General Law Expenses: This refers to the payment of legal costs awarded by the courts in judicial review matters and other applications connected to legal proceedings against the Director.

Chart 12 OFFICE EXPENDITURE

Charts 13 & 14 show a breakdown of expenditure on fees to counsel in the various criminal courts and by region in respect of the Circuit Criminal Court.

Fees paid to counsel in the Circuit, Central & Special Criminal Courts cover advising on proofs, drafting indictments, holding consultations, arraignments, presentation of the case and other necessary appearances e.g. for sentence.

Expenditure on fees in the High Court covers mainly bail applications and the preparatory work and hearings associated with judicial reviews.

Chart 13 FEES TO COUNSEL PAID BY COURT

Chart 14 FEES TO COUNSEL PAID BY CIRCUIT