I actually think, along with Lox, that it would be more important to have a barrister to support the victim, for example to challenge improper questioning by the defence (eg about the victim's previous history, which is supposed not to be discussed, but often is), and for this barrister to have spoken with the victim before the trial. The trial is between the Crown and the defendant, and the victim is a witness, not an injured party with the Crown acting to right the wrong done - if done. It isn't currently the job of the prosecutor to protect the victim.

That police might have access to previous complaints about a defendant, not continued with, might apply, but as there is apparently a pattern of women not reporting, because of their fears about the way the police might regard them, that the CPS might not take up the case because of perceived possibility of acquittal, the way the defence barrister may attack them, and the possibility that the defendant may walk free. There has been at least one case in the past, I recall, of a judge advising a jury that women have been known to lie in such cases.

It's not an easy problem, but I would feel happier if the gov. had waited for the people working on it to report before making their minds up.

Penny