It's not. Yet, the CPS have clear guidelines to follow when recommending on charging, and in layman's terms it needs to be above a 50% chance of conviction.True, which is crazy he wasn’t found guilty but that’s a bit of a side note to the fact Starmer and the CPS originally had tried to avoid opening a case because of conflicting coroners reports really isn’t a good look for a future leader of a supposedly left wing party
You can openly read the process (it's called the Charging Code), but it's another reason why many sexual assaults etc. don't reach court.
This isn't the police's fault; this isn't a political decision - well not in the mainstay. It simply boils down to meeting the threshold of being in the public interest.
The conflicting views of the pathologist reports meant he rightly or wrongly believed the chance of conviction was below this.
No idea about his personal circumstances, but if gross misconduct is proven and the offence is linked to police duties the pension can be forfeited.I believe the time taken for his 'managed departure' allowed him to get his 20 in so securing his pension.
