Freedom of Information: Costs – Angus Sinclair Case (R009434)
Thank you for your e-mail of 8 January 2015 under the Freedom of Information (
1) “What has been the total attributed costs of preparing and conducting the case against Angus Sinclair since the Double Jeopardy (Scotland) Act was implemented in 2011? [This will include in house costs in maintaining the case file, preparing an application to the Appeal Court, gathering new evidence, precognoscing new witnesses, preparing and conducting the trial at Livingstone High Court. It will include staff costs and material costs; commissioning of expert reports; commissioning of visual aids to the presentation of evidence including videos, still graphics and animated graphics; travel and subsistence costs for staff and witnesses and any other necessary activities in connection with the gathering and presentation of evidence.]”;
2) “Please itemise each of these costs separately as far as possible”;
3) “How many prosecution witnesses were listed? Please supply the full list”;
4) “How many gave evidence? Please supply the full list” and
5) “How many productions were listed? Please supply the full list”
I have considered each part of your request below.
1) The financial costs incurred in relation to individual cases are not recorded by COPFS. As such, the information that you have requested is not held in terms of section 17 of FOISA.
2) For the reason outlined above, this information is not held in terms of section 17 of FOISA.
3) There were 225 Crown witnesses listed on the indictment and subsequent notices that were lodged with the court in terms of section 67 of the Criminal Procedure (
I do not intend to provide you with a list of these witnesses as I consider that this information is exempt under section 38(1)(b) of FOISA as the information contains the personal data of third parties and disclosing it would contravene the data protection principles in Schedule 1 to the Data Protection Act 1998. This is an absolute exemption and there is therefore no requirement to consider the public interest.
4) 28 Crown witnesses gave evidence during the course of the trial. While I consider that providing the names of these witnesses could be exempted from release under section 38(1)(b) of FOISA, I have decided to provide you with a list of these witnesses at Annex A in an effort to assist you.
5) There were 398 productions and 207 labels listed on the indictment and subsequent notices that were lodged with the court in terms of section 67 of the Criminal Procedure (
In accordance with our obligations in terms of section 7(4) of the Data Protection Act 1998 (DPA), some of the information provided has been redacted to remove personal data of individuals, where this is necessary in terms of our competing obligations under the DPA.