All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

In a dramatic climax the jury returned guilty verdicts in the case of R v Sally Metcalfe, the hapless Coronation Street Councillor caught up in fraud, money laundering and bribery.

As viewers will know, poor Sally appears to be a victim of Duncan’s cunning plan to divert blame elsewhere.

Her fate now lies in the hands of the trial judge, but a custodial sentence appears to be a real possibility.

 

But, what options does Sally Metcalfe have in relation to appeal?

Sally and her legal team must move quickly as an appeal against conviction must be lodged within 28 days of the verdict. An application to appeal can be made ‘out of time’ but there must be a good reason for any delay.

Since we can be rightly critical of her legal team, one of the first decisions may well be whether to instruct new solicitors and counsel to advise.

But whatever the decision made in respect to legal representation, it is important to note that appeals are not to be viewed as an automatic ‘second bite of the cherry’.

The Court of Appeal will only overturn a conviction if it is ‘unsafe’, so Sally’s legal team will need to identify something that went wrong in the trial process; if nothing did go wrong then an attempt at appeal would simply be futile, raising false hopes.

Sally’s best bet will be to continue the battle to clear her name in the hope of finding evidence that points towards Duncan and his framing of Sally.

This is referred to as ‘fresh evidence’ and must be genuinely new evidence that was not available to Sally and her lawyers at the time of trial.

Of course, the case of Sally Metcalfe isn’t real, and we can expect the scriptwriter to exercise some editorial licence when it comes to explaining the intricacies of the law, so don’t take too much notice of the legal wrangling as it inevitably unfolds in future episodes.

In the real world, a wrongful conviction is a most dreadful experience for both defendants and their families, exacting the cruellest toll.

How can we help in your case?

If you require advice in relation to any appeal matter it is imperative that you act quickly. Our team of experienced lawyers are here, ready to take you through the process.

You can read more about how to appeal a Crown Court sentence here.

You can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Restorative Justice, or ‘RJ’ as it is sometimes known, is a way of holding offenders to account and can be used as an alternative to a caution or conviction, or alongside a sentence.

What happens with Restorative Justice?

Restorative Justice gives a victim the opportunity to meet or communicate with an offender to help the offender understand the impact of the crime.  It can also provide the offender with the chance to make amends.

This may be done in a face to face meeting or by way of a written apology.  Alternatively the offender could make amends to the community rather than to the victim directly.

Communication takes place in a controlled environment, if the meeting is face to face.  A facilitator will also be present. The meeting would centre on the harm caused and ways to repair that harm.

When can Restorative Justice be used?

For any kind of communication to take place the victim must be happy to participate.  The offender will also have to have admitted the offence and be willing to take part.

Gareth Thomas, the former Wales rugby captain, chose to deal with his complaint in this way after he was the victim of a homophobic assault.

The young person involved admitted the offence, and it is being dealt with by way of Restorative Justice rather than via a caution or through Court.

Mr Thomas said he thought that the offender could learn more through Restorative Justice than any other way.

Restorative Justice can also be used when an offender has received a prison sentence.  In another case, Cathryn Walmsley of Bolton was assaulted, the offender pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent, and a four-year term of detention was imposed.

Mrs Walmsley read a victim impact statement out in court to set out how the offence had affected her. She also said that she would like to sit down with the offender to discuss what he did because she believes that this may give her “closure”.

It may also assist the offender, and it is hoped in these circumstances that it would reduce the likelihood of any future offending.

Does it work?

Research undertaken by the government in a seven-year period found that there was an 85% victim satisfaction rate with the process following the use of restorative justice.  There was a also a reduction in the frequency of re-offending of 14%.

How can we help?

Many decisions relating to whether Restorative Justice is an appropriate alternative to a police caution or prosecution will be made at the point of police interview under caution or shortly afterwards.

We offer free and independent legal advice at the police station or anywhere else where you may be interviewed by the police.

A number of benefits to seeking advice can be found here, but an important benefit is that we will be able to advise you as to whether restorative justice could be available in your case and make representations or negotiate with the police on your behalf.

An example of a case where we have successfully negotiated a restorative justice disposal can be found here.

 You can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

In legal shorthand we often refer to section 18 or 20 offences.  These refer to specific offences under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.  They are offences that involve allegations of serious violence causing either Grievous Bodily Harm or Wounding.

What is the difference between section 18 and section 20?

The most serious form of assault, short of attempt murder, is an offence under Section 18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861.  This involves the causing of either Grievous Bodily Harm (GBH) or Wounding intending to cause such a serious injury.

An offence involving intent under section 18 carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment.  The same offence committed without intent under section 20 has a maximum sentence of only five years.

As a result, the offence can be committed in different ways:

• wounding with intent
• causing GBH with intent
• wounding without intent
• causing GBH without intent

‘Unlawfully and Maliciously’

For an offence to be committed unlawfully and maliciously it means that there is no defence such as self-defence, force used for preventing crime or the defence of property or another.

There are also some other technical differences between the two offences.

What is Grievous Bodily Harm?

 GBH or grievous bodily harm is really serious bodily harm.  It will include include broken limbs for example but can also include psychiatric injury.

What is wounding?

Wounding is where the skin is broken, either internally or externally.

Section 18 – the intent offence

 For the more serious offence intent to cause serious injury or wounding is required.

A jury needs to be satisfied that the offender intended to cause the harm.  They will do so by considering all of the relevant circumstances, including what the offender did and what he said about it.

What about weapons?

 The use of a weapon will make any offence more serious. Weapons include knives and bottles, or throwing acid.  Where feet are used to kick somebody they are treated as a weapon.  Biting will also be an aggravating feature in any case.

Section 20, the offence without intent

In such a case it is accepted that there was no intention to cause the injury.  For example this might be the case involving a single punch that causes a person to fall backwards leading to a serious injury or wound.

A jury will be helped to decided on this issue by looking at  evidence of the manner in which the assault was carried out or your behaviour at the time and afterwards.

What sentence will I get?

 For an offence committed with intent it is almost inevitable that a term of imprisonment will be imposed. The guidelines range from 3 years for a less serious offence through to 16 years for the more serious offences.

Examples of sentences imposed are:

• nine years when a bottle was used to strike the face requiring thirty stitches
• nine years also imposed for causing a fractured arm with a baseball bat, knocking down and driving over a police officer, kicks to the head on the floor causing extensive facial fractures.

For offences under section 20 the maximum sentence is 5 years, so a non-custodial sentence is more likely. The guidelines range from a community order to 4 years imprisonment.

Instruct an expert criminal law solicitor to represent you

The difference in sentencing for the absence of intent means that this issue has to be considered carefully in the context of all of the evidence.

We can advise you whether intent and other offence elements can be proven, and the prospects, if appropriate, of a plea to the lesser offence being acceptable to the prosecution and the court.

The law is complicated and the potential consequences of a prosecution severe.

As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an offence relating to grievous bodily harm or wounding 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>

Chesterfield Crime Solicitor Kevin Tomlinson has a wealth of experience defending motoring law offences.  He is known for his calm and unflappable approach which places clients at ease in what is often an alien environment for them.  These qualities are demonstrated by this particular case.

 

Kevin was instructed by a client who was accused of drink driving.  She had provided a specimen of breath showing that she was nearly three times the legal drink drive limit.

Investigation of a procedural irregularity

Our client was prepared to plead guilty to the offence and was seeking advice as to the likely penalty she would receive.  Kevin, however, sought his client’s instructions on the full circumstances of the offending and began to check the evidence that the prosecution had.

While there was no doubt that Kevin’s client had drunk alcohol before driving, the level has to be above the legal limit to drive. in order to convict her of the offence, therefore, the prosecution had to show that the evidence of the breath specimen was reliable.

If you are investigated for drink driving and provide a sample of breath at the police station you will be given a print out of the reading provided by the machine.

In this case, the printout provided to our client showed that there had been an error. The layout of the paperwork appeared to be wrong.  Kevin could not be sure that the breath test had been performed correctly.

At court Kevin spoke with the prosecutor to see if they had the same documentation as his client.   The prosecutor did not.  Their copy of the printout was correct.  It appeared, for whatever reason, that our client’s version had been incorrectly printed.

Kevin then took the time to speak with his client again.  It seemed clear that the machine had been working properly, bearing in mind his client’s instructions about how much she had had to drink and the prosecution copy of the printout.  Further, the decision that she made on plea would be important as the starting point on sentence in her case was a twelve week custodial sentence due to the level of the reading.

Would she choose to try and take advantage of a potential loop hole and risk loss of mitigation and prison if she was found guilty?

Suspended sentence followed a guilty plea

Having taken further instructions, it was clear that our client wanted to plead guilty and not try to challenge the reliability of the machine.

Following her plea, Kevin was able to advance substantial personal mitigation on her behalf which is always more compelling if it follows a guilty plea.  Kevin’s calm and measured approach persuaded the Magistrates that any sentence of imprisonment could be suspended.  In addition to the suspended sentence she also receive the inevitable driving ban.

She was extremely relieved and pleased with the outcome.

You can read more about the importance of an early guilty plea and and an expression of remorse here.

Contact an expert motoring law solicitor

Kevin Tomlinson is based at our Chesterfield office, but is able to provide nationwide advice and representation.  If you wish to instruct Kevin then his contact details can be found here.

We will always advise you as to your entitlement to criminal legal aid to ensure your free representation in the Magistrates’ Court.

You can read more about that here.

Alternatively, if one of our other offices is more convenient then you can find these contact details here.

You can also use the contact form below:

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

A recent case involving activation of a suspended sentence nearly brought Chesterfield crime solicitor Denney Lau to tears.  Despite having been qualified for 11 years and having represented any number of clients with many different circumstances before the court, this case was still able to cause distress.

Denney’ s client was appearing before the court in relation to breach of a suspended sentence order.  The starting point for breaching such an order is that the suspended sentence term must be activated.  It is possible to avoid this if the court can be satisfied that it would be unjust to do so in all of the circumstances.  As a result, Denney’s client was very much at risk of a custodial sentence.

The breach information set out that although our client’s initial compliance had been good, after several months he had simply stopped attending the appointments.  No explanation had been given.  On the face of it, our client was guilty of a complete disregard of a court order and there was unlikely to be any argument to avoid a prison sentence.

However, upon further investigation, this view of the case could not be further from the truth.

Compelling personal circumstances to avoid activation of a suspended sentence

During private consultation Denney was able to learn the full circumstances of his client’s failure to keep to the terms of the order.  His client had lost touch with the probation service following difficulties in his partner’s pregnancy.

During a routine scan, no heart beat had been detected.  Attempts were made to induce the birth.  Further complications arose and his partner had to undergo emergency surgery.

Although the baby was born, within two months our client was attending the funeral of his child.  He struggled to cope with these life changing events and had made several attempts to take his own life.

He had sought medical help and mistakenly believed that all of the professionals involved with his family would have liaised with each other so that compliance under the probation order had been suspended.  Unfortunately, the order does not work like that and it had continued.

Denney had to advise his client that despite his personal circumstances he was in breach of the suspended sentence order,  Had he spoken with the probation service they may have been understanding of his circumstances, but he had not.

It appeared, however, that the information from the client provided compelling reasons for the court to permit the order to continue.  The court agreed, having heard the mitigation, that it would be unjust to activate the suspended sentence.

The importance of instructing a criminal solicitor

This case illustrates the importance of instructing an expert criminal defence solicitor, whether you face activation of a suspended sentence or any other criminal offence.

Denney and his colleagues are used to hearing about people’s lives in great detail, whether that is by way of a police allegation or as part of a defence or mitigation.  As a result, we are experts at gathering relevant information and will have heard very similar cases many times over the years.  The horrific ordeal suffered by our client in this case still has the power to shock.

We were able to represent this client under the legal aid scheme.  This means that our representation before the Magistrates’ Court was free of charge to him.  This means that he was spared the ordeal of explaining deeply personal information to both the probation service and Magistrates.

You can read more about legal aid here.

You can contact your nearest office for an appointment to discuss your case.  Our contact details can be found here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below: