Agreed, the system is often unfairly lambasted. Usually as a consequence of critics getting the wrong end of the stick and misguidedly blaming the wrong culprit.
However, in the examples you give, the UK justice system might have better used its resources in not proceeding with them in the first place. In particular the CPS, smarting rather badly in the fall out from the Savile debacle, decided that a reasonably good chance of a guilty verdict could be expected in spite of no DNA or other corroborative evidence, no witnesses, and a classic case of his word/her word.
So a case was mounted without the benefit of circumstances that could lead to â€œbeyond reasonable doubtâ€: the criteria necessary for a guilty verdict. It doesnâ€™t help matters when Kier Starmer goes and gets a knighthood!
Worthy chap he may be, but it is his job, in it for a relatively short time, and with no mind boggling ground-breaking achievements! Could it possibly be his discretion over facts he knew about the plebgate affair but kept quiet about? Such as what happened on the day immediately before the altercation leading to the resignation?
Justice system? Curateâ€™s egg, I think.