All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

The case of Tommy Robinson, or to give him his real name, Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, has brought the issue of contempt of court into the public eye, but what is it all about?

What is contempt of court?

The interesting thing about contempt of court is the many ways in which it can be committed. It can be civil or criminal in nature. This means that conduct that is not itself a criminal offence can still be punishable by the court. Criminal contempt goes beyond simple non-compliance with a court order.

So, give me some examples?

In Yaxley-Lennon’s case, it was his reporting and commenting on a trial which was in progress with the potential to prejudice those proceedings. He had previously committed the same contempt by attempting to film defendants within the precincts of a court last year.

In a case in Sheffield, contempt of court was committed by protesters who had given an undertaking not to go within a safety zone erected around trees that were to be felled despite controversy.

In the civil court a freezing order was made against Andrew Camilleri.  He breached that order on a number of occasions.  This led the claimant to make an application to the court for committal to prison for contempt of court.

A further case involving breaches of freezing orders made in the civil court was that of Davies.  This case involved persistent and deliberate breaches.

A witness who refused to give evidence after ignoring a witness summons and being brought to court found himself on the wrong side of contempt of court proceedings.

A defendant who had an outburst in court during his sentence hearing, then refused to apologise, followed by another outburst, was dealt with for two contempt of court offences.  He received a sentence for this in addition to the offence for which he was already being sentenced.

A lady took photographs inside a court building of a defendant and their friends making ‘gestures of defiance and contempt’ inside the court precincts with the court notice board behind them. The defendant was also found to be in contempt for inciting the taking of the photograph.

So, tread carefully, it is easy to find yourself in the dock.

What can I get?

Up to two years imprisonment at the Crown Court or one month at the magistrates’ court (although it can be up to 2 months in relation to some civil orders).

Yaxley-Lennon received ten months imprisonment for his latest offence to be served consecutively to three months imprisonment for the offence last year, as he had been on a suspended sentence for that.  Both conviction and sentence are currently subject to appeal.

Two of the tree protesters received suspended prison sentences of two months.

Camilleri was fined £100,000 whilst Davies was given a sentence of 12 months immediate imprisonment.

The witness who refused to give evidence was given 12 months imprisonment, reduced to three months on appeal.

The defendant with his repeated outburst was given three- and six-months imprisonment consecutive to each other, and also to the 20 months for the original offences.

The photograph taking offender was given 21 days imprisonment with the defendant who incited the taking of it was given 28 days in prison.

How can we help?

It can be seen that there are some ways to commit contempt of court that the general public may not even realise could land them in trouble with the courts.

We are experts in this area and can advise and represent you.

On some occasions you will be interviewed by the police in relation to an alleged contempt.  If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an allegation of contempt of court then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early 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.

 You can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

What are football banning orders?

Football Banning Orders are a type of court order, usually made after a conviction for a ‘football related’ offence. They can last between three and ten years and will include one or more conditions which you must obey. Breach of a Football Banning Order is a criminal offence punishable by up to six months in prison.

How often are football banning orders imposed?

As at August 2018 there were 1822 Football Banning Orders in force.  This represents a fall of 6% over the previous season.

460 Football Banning Orders were imposed last season, down 57 from the previous year.

The good news for fans is that there were only 3.5 arrests for every 100 000 people who attended football matches.  Again, this is a reduction on the previous year.  Supporters of Championship clubs continued to account for the largest proportion of banning orders, with 34% of the total, or 621 orders.

What terms can be included in Football Banning Orders?

The conditions of football banning orders can include:

• Preventing you from attending football matches at home or abroad;
• Preventing you from going to a specific place or area for a period beginning two hours before a match starts until two hours after it finishes. In some cases this can include public transport or entire towns.
• Surrendering your passport before international football matches.
• Reporting at a local police station.

Exactly what conditions are made may vary depending on the facts of each case, however many Courts have ‘boilerplate’ Banning Orders- i.e. a pre-set list of ‘standard’ conditions which appear on most Orders that they make.

How could I be subject to a Football Banning Order?

Football Banning Orders were originally designed to prevent football hooliganism in the late 1980s but many supporters now finding themselves facing them, sometimes after conviction for minor offences or even where they haven’t been convicted of any offence at all. There are two possible ways to end up with one:

a)   After Conviction

The court must make a Football Banning Order if you are convicted of a ‘relevant offence’ and it is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that making a banning order would help to prevent violence or disorder. It is for the Prosecution to show that an order should be made because the offence was, in some way, football related. Relevant offences include:

• Possession of alcohol or being drunk while entering/trying to enter ground;
• Disorderly behaviour;
• Any offence involving the use or threat of violence towards another person or property;
• Any offence involving the use, carrying or possession of an offensive weapon;
• Drunk and disorderly;
• Driving or being in charge of a vehicle with excess alcohol, or driving or being in charge of a vehicle while unfit through drink or drugs.
• Throwing of missiles at a football match;
• Indecent or racialist chanting;
• Going onto the playing area;
• Unauthorised sale of tickets.

b)   ‘On Complaint’

The police can also apply for a Football Banning Order if an officer believes that you have (at any time) caused or contributed to any violence or disorder in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. These applications are usually based on police intelligence reports from football games. Many fans returning from EURO 2016 found themselves facing these applications despite not being charged or convicted in connection with any alleged behaviour in France.

If the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe it would help to prevent future football-related violence or disorder, they will make a Football Banning Order.

Can I fight it?

Yes.  Just because an application is made does not mean that it will be successful.  We will provide you with advice  so that you can resist the imposition of a Football Banning Order.

I already have a Football Banning Order. Can I apply to have it removed early?

Yes. You can apply to the court after two thirds of the order length has been completed.  For example, this could be after two years of three year order. The court will consider your character, your conduct since the Order was made, the nature of the offence or conduct which led to it and any other circumstances which appear to be relevant.

Can I get Legal Aid?

If you qualify financially, yes.

If you do not qualify for means tested criminal Legal Aid we can provide you with an affordable fixed quote.  This is so you will know in advance exactly how much our fees will be.

Contact an expert solicitor for advice about a football banning order

If you face investigation by the police, or proceedings before the Magistrates’ or Crown Court for a football related offence then you will wish to instruct a specialist solicitor.   They will be able to give you the advice and representation so that you can secure the best outcome from you.

As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early 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.

 You can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

Contact

• Name
• Phone Number
• Email
• Message
• CAPTCHA

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Two years ago, Nottinghamshire Police decided to label misogyny and offences targeting women as hate crime or hate incidents.

Two local universities recently undertook a report entitled “The Misogyny Hate Crime Evaluation”.  This report recommends rolling out the policy nationally.

The full report can be found here.

Misogyny hate crime is defined as “incidents against women that are motivated by the attitude of men towards women and includes behaviour targeted at women by men simply because they are women.”

 

This definition can include behaviour that is not criminal.  These are recorded as hate incidents rather than hate crime, so something such as wolf-whistling may be recorded as a hate incident.

The policy does not criminalise that behaviour.  It may, however, result in a discussion, for example, with building site managers if their workers are behaving that way.

Misogyny hate crime on the continent

In Belgium, however, such behaviour can be criminal.  A man has been convicted under a new law which does criminalise sexism. He was stopped driving a car for breaking the highway code and told the female police officer to do a job “adapted to women”. He was fined €3,000 for insulting the officer because of her gender.

The offence in Belgium is expressing contempt toward a person because of their sexuality or treating them as inferior due to their sexuality.   If the behaviour complained of entails a serious attack on their dignity, it is punishable by up to 12 months in prison.

In France, they are preparing to create an offence of street harassment that is “sexist and sexual outrage”.  Meanwhile, in Stockholm, sexist advertising has been banned.  Our London Mayor, Sadiq Khan, has attempted to ban body shaming adverts.

What will happen in the UK?

Chief constables from the United Kingdom met in July 2018 to discuss the issue and whether the policy in Nottinghamshire would be rolled out nationwide.

The issue has also prompted discussion in Parliament over the autumn.

These developments in the UK and other countries demonstrates how the law is continually evolving. It may be that such behaviour will be a statutory aggravating feature of an offence when sentencing or disposal is dealt with, or it may become an offence on its own.

How can we help?

 Allegations that involve elements of sexism or misogyny are always likely to be treated more seriously than cases where it is not a feature.

As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early 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.

 You can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

The 2015 documentary series Making a Murderer follows the story of two men from Wisconsin who were convicted of sexually assaulting and murdering a woman.

One of the convicted was an impressionable teenager called Brendan Dassey.  Dassey’s conviction was overturned in 2016 (and confirmed on appeal in 2017) on the basis that his ‘confession’ to the murder was coerced by police officers who exploited his vulnerable character.

What is the law in the England and Wales?

Provisions in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 allow courts to reject confessions of this kind on the basis that they were obtained ‘oppressively’ or are unreliable.

The relevant statutory provisions relating to the admissibility of confessions are ss. 76(2)(a) and (b) and 77 of the Act.

What does “oppressive” mean?

The term ‘oppressive’ has caused problems for the courts. It seems to be agreed that oppression implies some “impropriety” which compromises the confession’s veracity (Fulling [1987] QB 426).

Uncertainty exists, however, as the same sort of behaviour in different cases has led to the confession being excluded in one but not the other (see Paris (1993) 97 Cr App R 99; L [1994] Crim LR 839).

What about unreliability?

Aside from oppression, confessions may be excluded on the basis of unreliability. This unreliability may come about via “anything said or done” or something problematic concerning the circumstances in which the ‘confession’ was made.

An important point to note is that the suspect’s own conduct cannot undermine a confession (Goldenberg (1988) 88 Cr App R 285).

Another important reason to exclude a confession on the basis of unreliability is where the suspect is mentally unfit. A separate section of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 77,  deals with this.  In particular, the act seeks to protect suspects who may be suggestible and may simply go along with police officers’ leading questions about an alleged offence.

Deciding on the admissibility of confessions

The actual process for deciding whether a confession can be admitted is a ‘voir dire’. That is essentially a mini-trial within or alongside the main trial. Section 76(2) of PACE gives guidance on this point.

The prosecution must prove to the criminal law standard that the confession was not obtained in the way alleged by the defence, otherwise it will be excluded. And, although there is some disagreement, the standard position appears to be that the defendant’s evidence at the voir dire cannot be admitted during any trial for the substantive offence (Wong Kam-ming [1980] AC 247).

How we can help advise on admissibility of confessions.

Many of the problems that can arise with confessions will be removed if you have a solicitor with you to provide advice when you are interviewed.

As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any offence  then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

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

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we will be able to advise you about the admissibility of any confession you are said to have made at any stage where you dispute the accuracy or reliability of it.  Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

 You can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

There are two main offences that are prosecuted in relation to benefit fraud.  One involves dishonesty on behalf of the benefit claimant while the other does not.

Benefit fraud – the dishonesty offence

It is an offence to dishonestly make a representation in order to obtain benefit.  This offence includes circumstances where there has been a dishonest failure to promptly notify a change in circumstances, as well as making a claim that is dishonest from the outset.

Benefit fraud where a claimant is not dishonest

It is an offence to knowingly make a false statement to obtain benefit.  Again this can be in an initial claim for benefits or failing to give prompt notification of a change in circumstances.

What does this all actually mean?

The following definitions are given:

Dishonesty

This has the normal meaning that is used in criminal offences.

The lesser offence, of course, does not require dishonesty but does require proof of knowingly failing to notify.

The test for dishonesty was recently revisited by the Supreme Court and the result may well be that it is now easier to prosecute for dishonesty based benefit fraud.

Change in circumstances

There must be proof that the offender knew there was a change of circumstances and that the change would have effected a change in benefit.

Such changes in circumstance might include starting to live with a partner or gaining employment, or an inheritance leading to a change in finances for the better.

“Promptly notify”

Prompt is to be given its natural meaning and is a matter of fact. It is for the prosecution to prove that it was not prompt. It is therefore essential to explore all of the surrounding circumstances as this may provide a defence, not only mitigation.

Are there other offences?

There are other offences of fraud and false accounting related to benefits that are not covered in this article.

What is the likely sentence for benefit fraud?

The non-dishonesty benefit fraud offence an only be dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court and carries a maximum term of imprisonment of 3 months.

The offence involving dishonesty can be dealt with at the Magistrates’ Court or the Crown Court.  At the Crown Court it carries a maximum of seven years imprisonment.

The main factors for consideration in sentencing will be:

• the length of time of the over payment
• the total value of benefits overpaid
• whether or not the claim was dishonest from the outset.

A claim that is of high value, over a sustained period and which was dishonest from the beginning is more likely to attract a term of imprisonment.

The full sentencing guideline can be found here.

How can we help you defend a benefit fraud allegation?

Our advice, as always, is to seek legal advice as soon as you know that you are being investigated for an offence.

Early legal advice from an expert criminal solicitor may help you set out any defence that you might have in interview, or provide mitigation that might help you avoid a prosecution through the courts.

If a case gets to court then benefit fraud offences frequently generate vast quantities of paperwork.  Our solicitors, litigators and advocates have a great deal of experience in considering such evidence.  We will help you prepare your defence or mitigation upon a guilty plea.

Our involvement may mean a lesser value is given to any over payment.  This can have a direct impact on the potential sentence.

If you are in receipt of benefit then you are likely to receive free legal help under the legal aid scheme at the interview stage.

You can read more about the availability of criminal legal aid here.

You can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below: