Between October 2020 and September 2024 the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) says it lost more than 30 000 prosecutions in England and Wales. At least seventy murder or manslaughter cases and over five hundred fifty sexual‑offence investigations died because key evidence vanished, got damaged or simply could not be found. The scale of these blunders has sparked public anger, added fresh trauma for victims and put a lot of doubt on the whole criminal‑justice system.
The aim of this short paper is to repeat the facts in a plain academic way, look at why the evidence fell apart and what it means, and check how the CPS and victim groups have reacted. By placing the numbers inside bigger talks about evidence‑quality, fair process and victim‑focused policy, I hope to show the weak spots that let such failures happen over and over.
Evidence of Prosecutorial Collapse
Quantitative Indicators
Homicide Cases: At least seventy murder or manslaughter prosecutions stopped because evidence was missing.
Sexual Offence Investigations: More than five hundred‑and‑fifty sexual cases were scrapped for the same reason.
Overall Prosecution Failures: CPS data says over thirty thousand prosecutions fell apart in the four‑year span.
E72 Category Growth: The CPS tags cases where key evidence is missing as “E72.” In 2020 there were 7 484 E72 cases; the next year it grew nine percent to 8 180.
These numbers point to a worrying rise in evidential loss, especially in the most violent and sexual crimes.
Qualitative Testimonies
Ciara Bergman, CEO of Rape Crisis: She says each dropped sexual‑offence case is both a system failure to tackle rape and a huge blow to the survivor, making the already hard road to reporting even harder.
Neil Henderson, CEO of Safeline: He calls the pattern “another kick in the teeth for victims,” and notes that fewer people may now want to report crimes because they lose faith in the courts.
Both comments stress that the cost of a failed prosecution goes far beyond a lost conviction – it harms people’s trust in the rule of law.
Analytical Framework
Evidentiary Integrity and Fair Process
Fair‑process theory argues that how a case is handled matters as much as the final verdict. The CPS’s reliance on the E72 label shows a clear flaw: important pieces of proof – medical reports, forensic samples or expert testimony – are not kept well enough to be used at trial. When these pieces disappear, the prosecution cannot meet its burden of proof and the Crown must stop the case.
Institutional Accountability
The CPS has issued statements that sound like “When evidence problems happen we talk to the police and try to fix them together.” This team‑up promise acknowledges shared blame but does not spell out firm steps such as regular checks of evidence handling, required training for those who store proof or a law that forces proper preservation.
Victim Impact and Public Trust
The repeated loss of evidence deepens scepticism among survivors toward police and prosecutors. The remarks from victim groups show that missing proof not only steals justice in a single case but also chips away at the belief that the state will protect its people. This effect is especially sharp in sexual‑offence matters, where survivors already face stigma and many hurdles.
Discussion
Root Causes
Weak Evidence Management Systems: The climb in E72 cases points to problems in the chain of custody – how evidence is logged, stored and tracked.
Not Enough Money: Under‑funded forensic labs and stretched‑thin police teams may rush early work and forget to keep evidence safe.
Lack of Training: Staff who collect or catalogue evidence may not know the legal rules for keeping it admissible, which leads to slip‑ups.
Policy Gaps: No strong law forces everyone to follow strict evidence‑handling steps, so practices vary between forces and labs.
Consequences
Legal Results: The immediate effect is the dropping of cases, which means fewer convictions for serious crimes and more criminals walking free.
Victim Harm: Survivors face renewed trauma, feelings of betrayal and may be less willing to report future crimes, feeding a cycle of abuse.
Public Confidence: The picture of a “crumbling criminal justice system” damages trust in state bodies, which may make citizens less likely to help police.
Possible Reforms
Standardised Evidence Rules: Create nationwide, binding guidelines for gathering, storing and finding evidence, plus regular audits.
More Money for Forensics: Give dedicated funds to grow lab capacities, so evidence can be processed quickly and kept secure.
Victim‑Focused Steps: Put safeguards that protect victim‑provided proof, such as secure digital vaults and clear updates about evidence status.
Legal Accountability: Pass a law that punishes negligent handling of evidence, giving people a clear reason to follow best practice.
Conclusion
The loss of over thirty thousand prosecutions between 2020 and 2024 – including many homicide and sexual‑offence cases – shines a harsh light on a systemic failure to manage evidence in England and Wales. The rise in E72 recordings, together with the anger voiced by victim‑advocacy leaders, shows that current safeguards do not protect the rights of the accused nor the hopes of victims seeking justice.
Fixing this crisis will need several steps: make evidence‑quality a legal priority, give more money to forensic work, and put victims‑centred ideas at every stage of prosecution. Only with such broad reforms can the criminal‑justice system regain legitimacy, hold serious offenders accountable and keep its promise to protect those it serves.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c3e5289d3njo
https://witnessdirectory.com/signup.php
