Handcuffing of Defendants
Plain-English digest of CPS prosecution guidance.
AI-generated summary — not verbatim. This is a plain-English digest, not the official CPS text. It may omit detail or fall out of date. Do not rely on it for a charging decision — read the full guidance on cps.gov.uk and check the current legislation.
This guidance addresses the appropriate application of handcuffs for defendants during court appearances, emphasizing that visible restraint should only occur under substantial risk of violence or escape. Prosecutors are charged with making informed representations for handcuff applications, requiring proper justification and assessment of risks. The guidance reinforces the need for alternative measures to visible restraint and underlines the importance of maintaining the presumption of innocence in the eyes of the jury.
Key points
- Defendants should not be visibly restrained without sufficient reason.
- Alternatives to handcuffing must be explored before resorting to visible restraint.
- The court, not police or security staff, determines if a defendant is to be handcuffed.
- Applications for handcuffs should be scrutinized and justified strictly.
- Prosecutors must base applications for handcuffing on reliable information.
- Only prosecutors should make applications to the court regarding handcuffing.
Public-interest factors
- Rights of the defendant must be balanced against public safety.
- Presumption of innocence should be maintained in court settings.
- Use of restraints can prejudice the jury's perception of the defendant.
This is a factual digest of guidance published by the Crown Prosecution Service. Digested 2026-07-15. BlueLineHub is independent and not affiliated with the CPS.