All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

If you are being sentenced for an offence, the court will be aware of, and may take into account, any previous convictions you have. Whether this has any impact upon the sentence passed will very much depend on the date of those convictions and the relevance of any to the more recent offending.

If you plead not guilty, the court or jury can only be made aware of any convictions in certain circumstances. The relevant law is known as the ‘bad character provisions’.

What are the circumstances?

Prior to these provisions being introduced the court could be made aware of any bad character by way of similar fact evidence. So, for example, if a burglar had a particular or unusual way of committing offences, a Modus Operandi or MO, the detail could be given to the trial court. Whilst there were other ways in which evidence of bad character could be admitted, the general presumption was against evidence of previous convictions being used.

The new provisions expanded on the old law.

A defendant’s previous convictions may be admitted in court in the following circumstances:

• all parties agree
• a defendant introduces them himself
• it is relevant to an important matter in issue between the defendant and the prosecution
• it has substantial probative value in relation to an important matter in issue between the defendant and a co-defendant
• it is necessary to correct a false impression given by the defendant
• the defendant has made an attack on another person’s character

If you said in evidence when charged with theft, that you would never steal anything, and you had convictions for theft, it would mean the court is likely to be told about them.

If you called the prosecution witness a liar, you might find your convictions before the court.

As with the old law, any convictions based on your ‘MO’ could also be introduced. So, if you have previous convictions for burglary and are now charged with burglary, the prosecution may apply to admit this evidence.

Does this only apply to defendants?

You can also make an application for the bad character of a non-defendant or witness to be out before the court in certain circumstances.  Prosecution guidance as to disclosure of third party bad character evidence is here.

Instructing a specialist in bad character evidence

The law in respect of the bad character provisions is extremely complicated, there is extensive case law on the subject and this article is a very brief overview. Some practitioners are of the view that there is little that can be done to avoid bad character evidence being admitted – this is not something that we agree with, no concession should be made unless and until a detailed analysis of the circumstances has been carried out.

We can oppose any application on your behalf or make an application for a non-defendant’s character to be introduced.

We have the knowledge and experience to make these arguments on your behalf and guide you through the process.

The introduction, or otherwise, of any convictions may play a crucial part in the outcome of any trial.

Legal Aid will often be available to defend court proceedings.

We have offices across the East Midlands.

Contact your nearest office here. 

Alternatively you can use the contact form below

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Many people ask the question ‘should you represent yourself in court?’  This is in many cases because they know they are not eligible for legal aid or perhaps think they are not eligible.  People make this decision often without checking the position with a solicitor.

A recent study by Dr Charlotte Walker of York St John University revealed the following:

“In this study, in Court A, in 80 out of 220 (36%) hearings, the defendant appeared unrepresented; and in Court B, this was the case in 25 out of 183 (14%) hearings.

The defendants appeared without legal representation in 105 out of 403 (26%) hearings in total, which represents a significant minority.

Based upon the observations and interviews, this was due to a range of reasons including financial factors; defendants not wanting to delay proceedings; and defendants not seeing the value of having a lawyer.”

We accept that not everyone necessarily needs to be represented in court.  However, if legal aid is available then this is an entitlement.  It makes sense to ensure that all angles are covered.

It is perhaps ironic that some of the seemingly more basic cases, such as road traffic prosecutions, often throw up the trickiest legal issues.

According to Dr Walker, numerous studies have found that unrepresented defendants tend to struggle to represent themselves in court (Dell [1971], McBarnet [1981], Shapland [1981], Transform Justice [2016], Walker [2021]).

Can I afford legal representation?

If you are eligible for legal aid in the magistrates’ court, there is no cost to you. In the crown court, a contribution may be payable depending on your income. We can tell you in advance what the rules are in this regard.

You can read more about the legal aid schemes here.

Where legal aid is not available, many people are surprised at just how affordable “private representation” is. Many people have the idea that solicitors charge many hundreds of pounds per hour, and whilst a few do in corporate and commercial work, the pricing in criminal law is much more competitive and fixed fees are commonly offered for many cases.

You can read more about some of our fixed fees here.

There is no one answer to funding your criminal case, but you should always contact us for free to find out your funding options in detail. You have nothing to lose by doing so.

Contact an expert criminal defence lawyer

Before you have to ask the question ‘should you represent yourself in court’ contact one of our criminal defence solicitors at your nearest office.

Alternatively use the contact form below:

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

This week Nicholas Hawkes become the first person to be convicted for the new offence of “Cyber-Flashing”. Hawkes sent unsolicited photos of his erect penis to a 15-year-old girl and a woman.

The woman took screenshots of the image on WhatsApp and reported Hawkes to Essex Police the same day.

Sefer Mani, of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in the East of England, said:

“Cyber-flashing is a grotesque crime and the fact we were able to deliver swift justice for the two victims shows the new law is working.

Everyone should feel safe wherever they are and not be subjected to receiving unwanted sexual images.

I urge anyone who feels they have been a victim of cyber-flashing to report it to the police and know that they will be taken seriously and have their identities protected.”

This offence came in to force on 31 January 2024 and was created by the Online Security Act 2023. The Act inserts a new provision into the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (s 66A, an offence known formally as ‘Sending etc photograph or film of genitals’).

How is cyber-flashing committed?

A person (A) who intentionally sends or gives a photograph or film of any person’s genitals to another person (B) commits an offence if:

a) A intends that B will see the genitals and be caused alarm, distress or humiliation, or

(b) A sends or gives such a photograph or film for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification and is reckless as to whether B will be caused alarm, distress or humiliation.

References to sending or giving such a photograph or film to another person include, in particular:

(a) sending it to another person by any means, electronically or otherwise,

(b) showing it to another person, and

(c) placing it for a particular person to find.

What is the sentence for this offence?

Cyber-flashing carries a maximum penalty of up to 2 years imprisonment. A conviction also means that the notification requirements under the SOA 2003 also apply, depending on sentence length (commonly referred to as the Sex Offender Register).

This offence is one of a number enacted by the Online Safety Act 2023.

Seek advice from an expert criminal lawyer

Seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity will allow us to provide advice to you about the law and the evidence in either a police investigation or a prosecution.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any criminal allegation make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.  We will be present in your interview to advise through the investigation stage.

The advantages of such early advice legal advice can be found here.

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.

Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

There has been a lot of press coverage following reports before Christmas that the Court of Appeal had freed a woman prisoner due to her being pregnant.  The issue is regularly in the news, as shown by this story from 2022.  Some uncharitably view pregnancy as a potential ‘get out of jail free’ card.

The lady had previously received a mandatory five-year minimum term for a firearms offence, so the revelation that the sentence was reduced to two years imprisonment and suspended sparked some surprise.

As with all stories like this, it is wise to refrain from commenting before the full facts are disclosed, and following the release of the appeal judgment, it is now known, perhaps not surprisingly, that this is a somewhat exceptional case.

Unknown to anyone at the original sentencing hearing, including the appellant herself, she was then pregnant. The fresh evidence showed that the appellant learned of her pregnancy only when she underwent routine testing upon her admission to HMP Bronzefield after she had been sentenced. Her pregnancy was therefore a fact existing at the time of the sentencing hearing, and one which would undoubtedly have been an important factor in the recorder’s decision if it had then been known.

That factor in itself is somewhat unremarkable, and it is important to note that there were particular circumstances relating to this lady that the Court of Appeal focussed on.

Pregnancy as mitigation

The individual circumstances of this pregnancy included:

1. A family history of premature labour suggesting familial predisposition and therefore enhanced risk for the appellant, and repeated episodes of antepartum bleeding of unknown origin (‘ABUO’) during this pregnancy. ABUO episodes are clinically significant indicators of heightened likelihoods of serious complications including miscarriage, premature birth, low birth weight, placental abruption, foetal distress and hyperbilirubinemia.
2. Incarceration therefore created for the appellant a real and present danger to safe delivery and proper neonatal development for her baby.
3. A personal history of a very traumatic previous pregnancy loss, the detail of which it is unnecessary to set out here, and other previous trauma including domestic abuse, as well as a history of anxiety and depression intensifying the appellant’s vulnerability to mental health deterioration under the stress of pregnancy, labour and neonatal care in a prison setting.
4. Incarceration whilst pregnant for this appellant, therefore, has been and would be frightening, disorientating and traumatic in a way that was far beyond any unavoidable norm.
5. The recent development of pre-eclampsia, a condition which was diagnosed in the days before the hearing and which requires a level of monitoring and a reliable means of rapid specialist intervention that present particular challenges in the prison setting, which has added to the appellant’s fears for her own health and for her unborn child.

There was strong personal mitigation in this case apart from the various ways, not limited to its particular, much heightened health risks, why this pregnancy made imprisonment an unusually onerous punishment for this appellant.

The Court concluded:

“…we are satisfied that when the appellant’s pregnancy and its specific attendant consequences and risks, for the appellant and her unborn baby, are added to the other personal mitigation available to the appellant, there are exceptional circumstances relating to the appellant and her particular offence that, taken together, render it unjust to impose a custodial term of at least 5 years. The experience of custody was going to be, and has proved, traumatic and dangerous for this appellant beyond any kind of norm. By the date of the appeal hearing, she had in fact served the equivalent of a 14-month sentence, but the weight of punishment that has constituted for her will have been qualitatively equivalent to a much stiffer sentence. There are impeccable prospects of rehabilitation, and the interests of the appellant’s unborn child are a weighty factor if, as we have concluded, a sufficient custodial term, unconstrained by the statutory minimum, would be 2 years or shorter.

In all those circumstances, and on balance, we concluded that it was in the interests of justice to take the very exceptional course, for an offence of possessing the weapon involved in this case, of suspending the appellant’s sentence.”

It can be seen from the factual analysis of this case that pregnancy does not mean immunity from a custodial sentence. However, in all cases, pregnancy as mitigation will be an influential factor to be taken into account, which is why, in all such cases, our experienced lawyers are equipped to present a compelling case to any sentencing court.

Contact an expert criminal lawyer

Part of our preparation for sentence will be to discuss with you what information can be out before the court to mitigate sentence or secure a non-custodial sentence.  Pregnancy as mitigation is perhaps unusual but will of course be an important factor in any case.

We have criminal lawyers based in Chesterfield, Mansfield, Nottingham, Derby and Newark.  The contact details are here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

On 28th October 2023 provisions in the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 came into effect, enacting changes to the laws in relation to the rehabilitation of offenders.

These amendments extend the scope of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act as it applies to England and Wales so that certain custodial sentences of over four years currently excluded from rehabilitation may become spent, unless imposed in respect of certain offences.

It also amends the times at which different sentences may become spent and makes provision on the face of the Act for the rehabilitation periods that apply to certain orders on conviction.

The government states that over 120,000 former offenders will find it easier to get work and turn their lives away from crime following this change in the law.

Key Changes

Custodial sentences of four years or more years for less serious crimes become ‘spent’ after a seven-year period of rehabilitation, as long as no further offence is committed.

Some of the more serious sexual, violent, and terrorist offences are excluded from these changes.

The new rehabilitation periods are as follows:

*excluding serious sexual, violent, or terrorist offences, that continue to never be spent

Previous rehabilitation periods were:

The actual detail of these changes can be quite complex, so do not hesitate to contact us to discuss the direct implications of these changes on your own circumstances.

How can we help?

 We will provide advice on the effect of any sentence.  This will be done at the conclusion of proceedings.  If you need further advice then please contact your nearest office.  Our experienced criminal solicitors will be happy to help.

Alternatively use the contact form below.