Why does the CPS treat PWITS more seriously than simple possession?

• A. The CPS treats PWITS more seriously than possession because it involves distribution and harm to the public
• B. CPS treats PWITS the same as possession
• C. PWITS is not charged by CPS
• D. CPS requires no evidence of knowledge

Answer: (A)

The important idea here is that possession with intent to supply includes an extra element beyond simple possession: the person intends to distribute the drugs to others. That introduces broader harm to the public because supplying drugs creates and sustains a distribution network, increases availability, and risks wider harm to communities. Because of this greater potential for harm and the involvement of dealing this makes the offence more serious in the eyes of the CPS, leading to harsher penalties and more robust prosecutions.

Simple possession, by contrast, is typically linked to personal use and doesn’t involve the same level of social harm or the creation of a distribution chain, so it’s treated less severely. The other statements aren’t accurate because PWITS is charged by the CPS, it carries an intent element to prove supply, and while knowledge can be inferred, the key point is proving the intent to supply, not that there is no knowledge.