The Bible and free speech: CPS disowns statement that parts of the Bible are unfit to be read aloud in public anymore

Kate Hoey, the former Labour MP who now sits in the House of Lords, has obtained an admission from the government that such a declaration should never have been made.

Via a written question in the Lords, Baroness Hoey had asked the government "what assessment they have made" of the CPS' claim about the Bible.

She has now received a response from Lord Stewart of Dirleton, representing the Attorney General's Office.

He said: "The Wessex Area of the CPS has undertaken a post-case review and acknowledges that the statement was inappropriate.

"The statement was not intended to and does not represent a change to published CPS policy.

"It is not indicative of a general approach by the CPS to cases involving the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and the right to freedom of expression.

"As a result of the post-case review, in future, where skeleton arguments are ordered, in cases where there is scope for argument to arise as to rights such as that of freedom of expression, such arguments will be submitted to the Senior District Crown Prosecutor for signing off, prior to service."

– HOW DID THIS ALL START? –

This is just the latest twist in a major UK news story which the News Letter has been alone in following.

It is a story two years in the making, and began with efforts to charge a man called John Dunn with threatening or abusive behaviour that amounted to harassment.

Mr Dunn had been preaching in the street in Swindon, Wiltshire, two years previously when a lesbian couple walked by.

It was alleged Mr Dunn had shouted that the women would "burn in hell" and called one of them a "devil woman".

Mr Dunn denied this.

His lawyers said that he had told the couple: “It says in the Bible that homosexuals will not inherit the kingdom of God”.

The case against him fell apart when the complainants could not be reached.

But during its attempts to convict him, it emerged that the CPS had made the following statement in writing to the defence team:

"Whether a statement of Christian belief or not, the court is being asked to consider whether the language has the potential to cause harassment, alarm or distress…

"There are references in the bible which are simply no longer appropriate in modern society and which would be deemed offensive if stated in public."

The CPS gave examples of what these offensive bits of scripture are, though they managed to get their verses mixed up in the process.

Their approach has since been criticised as heavy-handed by barristers and traditionalist Christians – although all the biggest churches in Ireland and England have remained steadfastly silent on the issue.

The answer obtained by Baroness Hoey’s parliamentary question stands in contrast to repeated sidestepping of the issue by the CPS when contacted by this newspaper.

When criticism of its stated stance on the Bible was put to it, the CPS would only say this:

“On the day of the trial the complainants could not be located to provide vital evidence for the prosecution, which resulted in us offering no evidence.

“It is not the function of the CPS to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments of the evidence to put our case before the court.”

More from this reporter:

– Irish policeman who survived lethal IRA landmine trap reacts to Mary Lou McDonald statement that ‘no gardai should have been hurt’ in Troubles

– Call for new law to curb ‘cultural acceptance of terror’ after alleged 'Up the Ra' incident involving Edwin Poots