CPS tells prosecutors to use ‘preferred pronouns’ in court

Prosecuting lawyers have been urged not to use biologically-correct pronouns and names for transgender victims, witnesses and defendants.

New Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) guidance also uses a wide, subjective definition of a “hate crime”.

The Christian Institute warned that the guidance could lead to people being required to lie.

False statements

In its new Trans Equality Statement, the CPS said: “Prosecutors should address Trans victims, witnesses and defendants according to their affirmed gender and name, using that gender and related pronouns in all documentation and in the courtroom.”

On hate crime, the CPS says it has agreed to a definition that is “wider than the legal definition”.

It covers people who ‘perceive’ that a crime has been carried out because of a transgender identity, rather than it being demonstrably the case.


The Christian Institute’s Ciarán Kelly said the new guidance was “concerning”.

“A court of law is an arena for truth and justice.

“People should not be encouraged to make statements they know to be false – especially in a courtroom.”

No case

In March, the UK’s first transgender ‘hate crime’ case was dismissed by a judge who said: “There is no case and never was a case.”

Miranda Yardley, who underwent ‘gender reassignment’ surgery ten years ago, was accused of harassing a transgender rights activist on Twitter.

Helen Islan, who works for notorious trans-activist group Mermaids, accused Yardley of committing a hate crime by publicly voicing that people cannot change sex.


Despite changing his name to Miranda and under-going surgery himself, Yardley still recognises that he is a man.

Their argument began in an online conversation about whether individuals can choose if they want to be male or female.

When Yardley disagreed – and also revealed Islan’s identity – the trans-activist went to the police claiming the post made her feel “stressed and sick”.

No evidence

Essex police decided Yardley’s response was a hate crime.

But the judge considering the case dismissed it after a one-day hearing, saying that there was no evidence of a hate crime or harassment.

Related Resources