The Metropolitan Police made a comical attempt to prosecute itself for not answering its own letters, before giving up due to “insufficient evidence”.
The force mounted two criminal prosecutions last month over suspected speeding offences, naming itself as both the prosecutor and the defendant.
Two cases were prepared – at public expense – for criminal prosecutions, with the Met charged with offences and a file prepared for the court.
But the charges were then dropped, with the court recording the reason as “insufficient evidence”.
The criminal cases were brought through the Single Justice Procedure (SJP), a fast-track court process which is currently mired in controversy.
The SJP system has been dubbed “conveyor belt justice”, with fears that not enough thought is put into each criminal case due to the speed of the process.
Defendants are informed they have been charged with a criminal offence by letter, with instructions to enter a plea online or in writing. The courts typically then deal with cases in private, based on written evidence alone.
In the recent cases, the Met was charged twice with failing to give information relating to the identification of a driver when required.
On January 22, it was alleged a Toyota Corolla had broken the 50mph speed limit by travelling at 71mph on the A2 in Bexley.
A Met Police staff member prepared a witness statement, setting out that letters to a PO Box belonging to the Met sent in January and March had gone unanswered.
The decision to bring a criminal charge was not signed by an identified person, but were simply marked “officer in charge of Metropolitan Police”.
The second case related to speeding on the same stretch of the A2 two days later, when a different Toyota Corolla was clocked at 68mph at just before 2am.
The same police staffer signed a witness statement about letters going unanswered which had been sent to the PO Box address.
It is unknown whether the Met got to the stage of entering pleas to the criminal charges.
Thousands of motorists are prosecuted for speeding every week in the same way, using written evidence and letters sent to defendants.
When a vehicle is caught speeding on an automatic camera, it is routine for police forces to write to the registered owner to check who was driving.
Those who do not respond are frequently prosecuted for failing to provide information to the police.
In the cases involving the Met, the charges were withdrawn before they could go before a magistrate.
Scotland Yard usually asked for £110 in costs for each traffic offence it investigates and prepares for court.
Scotland Yard has been contacted for comment.
