Costly... the three goldfish were worth £2.30 each, or just £7 in total
Accused 'Fish-Killer'... Chantelle Amies.BUNGLING cops have wasted thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money after the trial of a teen accused of killing three GOLDFISH worth just £7 collapsed.
Hundreds of man-hours were also lost investigating the crime and today the legal fiasco was blasted as "bizarre" and a total waste of money.
Chantelle Amies, 19, was charged with criminal damage after her next-door neighbour's three chocolate goldfish died. Amies, of Norwich, was accused of poisoning the fish using bleach after a bitter dispute.
The shocked teenager denied killing the beloved pets and was hauled before magistrates yesterday.
But chairman of the bench, Mary-Anne Massey, decided there was no case to answer after being told blundering police failed to send crucial evidence away for tests because they would cost too much money.
The average magistrates trial is estimated to cost at least £2,000.
But this was the third time the case had been listed in court requiring parties to be present, meaning the final bill could be much higher.
Furious Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers Alliance, slammed the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for taking the case to court.
He said: "Regardless of the type of offence being alleged, it is wasteful and unjust to bring a case all the way to court without sufficient evidence.
"The CPS is meant to filter out cases that are too weak to secure a conviction, so it is bizarre that this case got so far."
He stressed: "Given that there are plenty of stronger cases that never get fully pursued, the CPS need to work harder at securing good value."
A serving Norwich magistrate, who did not wish to be named, insisted: "It's frustrating when the court system falls down because of basic errors made at the source which mean everyone's time is wasted and taxpayers have to foot the bill.
"It begs the question why on earth it got to court in the first place if the evidence was not sorted out."
The court had heard how Amies allegedly put bleach in the goldfish bowl, which belonged to a neighbours four-year-old son, on September 12 last year.
Susanna Chowdhury, prosecuting, said Amies fingerprints had been found on a bottle of bleach in the house and on the fish tank.
But the court was told that although water in the fish tank had been taken by police they had not sent it away for analysis.
Therefore, Philip Farr, defending, said they could not prove there had been bleach in the tank or whether the fish had been killed by bleach.
A CPS spokeswoman refused to say how much the entire saga had cost.
She said: "We obviously felt in this case that we had enough evidence for a conviction and that it was in the public interest to bring this case to court.
"However, we respect the decision made by the magistrates in dismissing this case."
Norfolk Police today refused to comment on the shambles.
The shocked teenager denied killing the beloved pets and was hauled before magistrates yesterday.
But chairman of the bench, Mary-Anne Massey, decided there was no case to answer after being told blundering police failed to send crucial evidence away for tests because they would cost too much money.
The average magistrates trial is estimated to cost at least £2,000.
But this was the third time the case had been listed in court requiring parties to be present, meaning the final bill could be much higher.
Furious Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers Alliance, slammed the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for taking the case to court.
He said: "Regardless of the type of offence being alleged, it is wasteful and unjust to bring a case all the way to court without sufficient evidence.
"The CPS is meant to filter out cases that are too weak to secure a conviction, so it is bizarre that this case got so far."
He stressed: "Given that there are plenty of stronger cases that never get fully pursued, the CPS need to work harder at securing good value."
A serving Norwich magistrate, who did not wish to be named, insisted: "It's frustrating when the court system falls down because of basic errors made at the source which mean everyone's time is wasted and taxpayers have to foot the bill.
"It begs the question why on earth it got to court in the first place if the evidence was not sorted out."
The court had heard how Amies allegedly put bleach in the goldfish bowl, which belonged to a neighbours four-year-old son, on September 12 last year.
Susanna Chowdhury, prosecuting, said Amies fingerprints had been found on a bottle of bleach in the house and on the fish tank.
But the court was told that although water in the fish tank had been taken by police they had not sent it away for analysis.
Therefore, Philip Farr, defending, said they could not prove there had been bleach in the tank or whether the fish had been killed by bleach.
A CPS spokeswoman refused to say how much the entire saga had cost.
She said: "We obviously felt in this case that we had enough evidence for a conviction and that it was in the public interest to bring this case to court.
"However, we respect the decision made by the magistrates in dismissing this case."
Norfolk Police today refused to comment on the shambles.
No comments:
Post a Comment