The Press and Journal (Inverness, Highlands, and Islands)
MSPs call for answers after wildlife crime cases dropped Letter requests clarification
MSPs have asked the Crown Office to clarify how it handles evidence in wildlife crime cases after the prosecution of an alleged bird of prey shooting was dropped.
RSPB Scotland said one of its cameras at the Cabrach in Moray recorded evidence suggesting a hen harrier had been illegally killed in June 2013.
The camera was monitoring the active nest of a breeding pair of hen harriers on the Cabrach Estate, but the Crown Office said the evidence would not be admissible in court.
Wildlife campaigner Chris Packham said he was “very angry” about the case being discontinued and accused the Crown Office of a “lack of consistency”.
The prosecution service said its actions had been “entirely appropriate”, having concluded RSPB investigators had entered the land and gathered evidence for the purpose of prosecution, rendering it inadmissible. The Crown Office also defended the decision to drop a similar case from Angus on the same basis.
The issue follows anger in the Highlands last month when police announced they had no choice but to drop a highprofile inquiry into the largest spate of raptor poisonings in Scotland.
The remains of 12 red kites and four buzzards were found on land to the east of Conon Bridge in March and April 2014, but nobody was ever charged.
Now, Holyrood’s environment, climate change and land reform committee has written to the Crown Office seeking clarification on evidence admissibility.
The letter states: “The committee has noted recent high-profile instances where video evidence of alleged offences was available and not utilised, it has been suggested, on the grounds of admissibility.”
Committee convener Graeme Dey said: “Our committee has today written to the Crown Office
“There’s clearly an argument for the use of video or social media”
seeking clarity on the use of evidence, particularly video evidence, in helping to address crimes against Scotland’s precious wildlife.
“These days, there’s clearly an argument for the use of video, CCTV, or even social media to be considered when a crime against any animal is alleged to have been committed.”
A Crown Office spokesman said the organisation is “committed to the rigorous, fair and independent prosecution of crime, including wildlife and environmental crime”.
He added: “The investigation of crime is subject to rules which have developed over many years and aim to strike a balance between enabling justice to be done and protecting the public from illegal or irregular invasions of their liberties. The Crown requires to apply the law fairly and independently to the circumstances of each case.”