Evans: CPS should repay legal fees

[super jumbe]

Conservative MP Nigel Evans has demanded the Crown Prosecution Service repay his ?130,000 legal expenses after he was cleared of a string of sex offences.

Mr Evans, who was found not guilty of rape and sexual assault at a court on Thursday, said the case had cost him his entire life savings.

In an interview with the Mail On Sunday, the former deputy speaker in the House of Commons said that he contemplated suicide during the "very darkest moments" of his 11-month ordeal, which he described as a witch-hunt and "a very public execution attempt".

The 56-year-old called for a review of laws that grant anonymity to alleged victims of sex crimes, which he said were "unbalanced", and questioned the way the CPS had handled recent cases of historic sexual allegations against high-profile people.

He said: "I feel cheated by the fact that if my seven accusers and I walked down the street none of them would be recognised but I would be because I was the only one who was named. And I have been cleared, while their allegations have been shown to be false."

Speaking of the impact fighting the case had on him, Mr Evans told the newspaper the legal battle had cost him his ?130,000 life savings, saying: "Every penny is gone, in addition to the ?30,000-a-year additional parliamentary salary I was paid as Deputy Speaker."

He added: "If someone is dragged through the courts through no fault of their own and is acquitted they should get their legal fees back from the CPS budget.

"Maybe that will make them focus on whether a case is worth pursuing."

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/evans-cps-should-repay-legal-fees-1

[super jumbe]

If CPS does pays it will be paid from tax payer’s money, I have noticed numbers of cases brought in resent months are described as a witch-hunt.

[Cod3waX]

why are the accusers not being prosecuted for wasting the courts time and lying? they are the ones that should pay this poor bloke back

[GastonJ]

If they do, it shouldn't go for MP's only - it should be for anyone who has been found not guilty, and that would cost an awful lot of money.

[super jumbe]

If they do, it shouldn't go for MP's only - it should be for anyone who has been found not guilty, and that would cost an awful lot of money.

They should all be paid when proved innocent.

Mr Evans had been through a harrowing experience, No innocent person should b left out of pocket after clearing their name.

Crown prosecution who brought the case against him, if that was the case he had no choice but to defend the allegations against him, but surely the fact that he won, means the plaintiff's pays his bill? I'm thinking that it won't be long before the CPS comes under scrutiny as not fit for purpose.

Our system is that the jury decides, and not like the kangaro court.

[Snowy79]

He's been an MP for years and anonymity has been brought up plenty of times yet until an MP gets accused they don't push for it. Maybe it will make them pay attention to how the public suffer.

[GastonJ]

and in answer to SJ's point - he'll probably claim it on his expenses anyway............... However if he gets anything it should only be the same as whatever they'd pay in legal aid, not the amount he's claiming. After all it's what the Tory party are about, cutting down the cost of being defended for people who have to use legal aid, if they can get it.... ... or is that just increasing the chances of not being defended at all because you can't afford it. Justice only for the those that can afford it hmmm

Under changes brought in in 2012, only defendants who apply for legal aid before their trial are entitled to any costs after they are acquitted.

Maybe he missed that vote?

The CPS will come under scrutiny because they dared to prosecute an MP, nothing more nothing less. It''s called revenge.