All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Derby prison law solicitor Rosamunde Benn represented a client at adjudication at HMP Stoke Heath.  The client then took the time to provide favourable feedback on the representation that she provided him.

Representation at an independent adjudication

Rosamunde’s client had been charged in the prison with using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour contrary to Prison Rule 51, paragraph 20.

Some information from the Howard League for Penal Reform about the use of adjudications since 2010 can be found here.

While attending education her client was alleged to have called the officer a ‘sausage’.  He then told the officer to  ‘shut up’.  He was said to have made a further threat that he would ‘see you on the other side of those gates’.  Comment was also made that the teacher was afraid.

Our client denied making any such threats.  He was also able to offer a witness to the incident who would support his account.  In essence, he claimed that the incident had been blown out of all proportion.

Rosamunde’s client entered a not guilty plea and then the officer gave evidence.  Our client then gave his evidence and so did his witness.

The District Judge presiding over the adjudication did not find the charge proved because of the witness evidence.   He stated that although he found that the officer had given good evidence, the witness had given credible evidence as well.  He could not be sure that our client’s conduct was in breach of the rules so dismissed the charge.

Positive client feedback

At the conclusion of his case, our client took the time to offer positive feedback.  The feedback was all the more pleasing because he had not used VHS Fletchers before.  He stated ‘I was treated very well and would pass on how great your service is‘.  He then said ‘I was very pleased how well you came across.  Your advice and demeanour was great’.

When asked whether he had any suggestions that might help improve the level of service that we provide he replied ‘I do not have anything to say.  You are by far the best I have used’.

Instruct a Derby prison law solicitor

If you, a family member or friend require advice about any aspect of prison law then please get in touch with Derby prison law solicitor Rosamunde Benn.  She can be contacted by telephone on 01332 546818 or by using the form below.

Many aspects of the law remain in the scope of the legal aid scheme so advice will be free.  If not we aim to offer affordable fixed fees so that all prisoners have access to professional prison law advice and representation.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Senior Crown Court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier recently represented a client charged with conveying prohibited articles into prison.  In this case it was cannabis and mamba, List A and List C items.

Sarah’s client was in a difficult position because the sentence for such offences is almost inevitably a prison sentence.   In this case his position was worse as he had been convicted before of a similar offence.  In that case he had received a six month prison sentence.  As a result, if convicted , prison would seem inevitable.

Detained with Cannabis and Mamba

Sarah’s client had attempted to enter Nottingham Prison with two wraps of what he thought was mamba in his underwear. He was stopped because a  sniffer dog indicated that he ought to be searched.  When the items were discovered he immediately said he believed it was mamba.  When it was tested only one wrap was found to contain mamba.   The other contained cannabis although the wraps looked very similar in appearance.

The difference was potentially important in terms of sentence.  Cannabis was a List A article, whereas Mamba was not.  The maximum sentence was 10 years in prison, whereas the penalty for a List C article was a fine.

The prosecution was persuaded that  Sarah’s client could be sentenced on the basis that he believed that he was bringing a List C article into the prison.  Despite his record the court was persuaded to adjourn the case for a pre-sentence report.

At our client’s request, we instructed counsel Ben Isaacs of 7 Bedford Row Chambers.  Following extensive mitigation  the Judge was persuaded that the inevitable prison sentence could be suspended.  He received an 8 month prison sentence suspended for 18 months with community elements because of these arguments.

The Current Law on Conveying Prohibited Articles into Prison

Once an individual had knowingly conveyed a package containing any prohibited article into prison he was criminally liable for the contents.   As a result, a person will bear the risk of a significant sentence even when they thought that they were bringing in a less serious, List C item.

Their belief is likely to be important mitigation, but cannot be a defence.

Contact Crown Court Litigator Sarah Lees-Collier

If you face an allegation of conveying prohibited articles into prison or any other criminal offence then please contact Sarah.  She can be reached at our Nottingham office on 0115 9599550 or alternatively you can contact her using the form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Prison law specialist and departmental manager Irene Tolley secured a transfer to open conditions directly from the high security estate in a very complicated case before the parole board.

Her client had originally been serving a life sentence for an allegation of conspiracy to murder.  The minimum term imposed in 2009 was one of 17 years.

He had initially been a Category A prisoner.  Irene had earlier been successful in persuading the Category A board that his categorisation be downgraded to Category B.

Irene’s client had maintained his innocence in relation to the allegation of conspiracy to murder so he appealed the conviction. The Court of Appeal directed a re-trial and he was acquitted.  Although appeals against conviction for the robbery matters were refused, a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection was imposed instead with a minimum term of 7 years.

Oral hearing before the Parole Board

Immediately following the successful appeal, Irene made representations that her client needed the benefit of an oral hearing. Because of the complications his case should not be dealt with as a paper review.

She requested that his oral hearing be brought forward to take into account a significantly reduced minimum term.  As a result, his oral hearing was heard just a fortnight after the expiry of his tariff.

Joint Representation with Queen’s Counsel

As the history of the case was complicated, Irene contacted counsel James Wood QC because he had undertaken the successful appeal on behalf of her client.  Irene had worked with counsel on many occasions over a 30 year career in criminal representation and prison law.  As a result he agreed to jointly represent their client at the oral hearing.

Neither release or open conditions were supported by the offender supervisor, offender manager or psychologist.  Application was made on his behalf for release despite the fact that our client was still in the high security estate.  The report writers were of the view however he ought to remain in closed conditions in the Category B estate.

Full argument was made to the panel on his behalf, with additional argument that if the panel did not agree with release he still ought to be moved to Category D open conditions.

Recommendation of move to open conditions

After argument from both lawyers the parole board decided to recommend a move to open conditions.  This has now been approved by the Secretary of State.  A further review was set for 15 months time to allow for resettlement and further risk assessment. Bearing in mind his good progress in prison so far, despite his sense of injustice, it appears likely that following compliance he will be released following the next review.

Appropriate representation and argument was provided on behalf of our client by both Irene and Queen’s Counsel.  He was very pleased with the result.

Contact prison law specialist Irene Tolley

If a friend or family member needs advice in relation to any aspect of prison law then please contact us.  Legal aid is still available for many aspects of prison law including parole board hearings.  If legal aid is no longer available then we will discuss the possibility of representation under an affordable fixed fee.

Irene can be contacted on 0115 9599550 or you can use the form below to contact us.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

If you are going to Glastonbury, Reading, Leeds or any other festival this summer, please take note!  Because of changes in the law you need to leave your pyrotechnic articles at home!

 

Flares banned at festivals

Music festivals are following in the footsteps of football matches as a new law took effect from 3 April 2017.  This banned the use of pyrotechnics at music festivals.  Section 134 of the Policing and Crime Act 2017 states that anyone caught with a “pyrotechnic article” at a “qualifying musical event” in England or Wales could face up to three months in prison and/or a fine.

While many believe that pyrotechnics and flares contribute to the atmosphere of an event, it is difficult to argue with how dangerous they are, particularly in a crowd. The law follows considerable public demand in 2016 because of anecdotes of serious burns and panic attacks brought on by smoke.

The background can be found here.

The risk at festivals such as Glastonbury is obvious because of the amount of heat and smoke that it gave off. From a distance they may look spectacular but it could only be a matter of time before somebody is seriously injured. The law is moving to prevent that because of this.

Pyrotechnic Articles

This is defined as “an article that contains explosive substances, or an explosive mixture of substances, designed to produce heat, light, sound, gas or smoke, or a combination of such effects, through self-sustained exothermic chemical reactions.”  It does not includes matches.  It was, however, specifically designed to include flares, fireworks and smoke bombs.

 Qualifying Music Festival

This is a music festival licensed under the Licencing Act 2003 so if in doubt you can safely assume that all major festivals are included.

There are no sentencing guidelines yet published for this offence because it is new legislation.  It should be noted however that the maximum sentence is identical to that for entering a football ground with a firework unders.2A of The Sporting Events (Control of Alcohol etc.) Act 1985. Offences under that legislation regularly attract custodial sentences and we should expect the courts to react in the same way for the new offence.

If you are not going to a festival or football match it is still legal to possess fireworks, as long as you are over 18.

Effective policing?

There is a difficulty in enforcing the law at a festival compared to a football ground. Police will struggle to enter a festival crowd, particularly near the front.  Also, the crowd isn’t monitored on CCTV as it is at football.  So most arrests for possessing pyrotechnic articles are likely to come at the festival gates, as with drugs.

Contact us for further advice

If you have any queries about the legislation or if you are accused of having pyrotechnic articles at a qualifying event please contact one of our expert criminal law solicitors at your nearest office.   Details can be found here.

Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Although previously linked with VHS Fletchers as a consultant, we are pleased to announce that Chesterfield crime solicitor and protest law specialist Gavin Haigh is now an employed member of our criminal team.

Gavin prides himself on his meticulous attention to detail.  His robust defence of clients on all matters makes him a formidable advocate and police station representative. Gavin is not shy to raise objections when required and forcefully protect his client’s rights at all times.

Specialist in Protest Law

Gavin has been a qualified solicitor and Duty Solicitor for 12 years and during that period he has has found a particular interest and specialism in the criminal law as it affects protests and marches.

This can involve advice on:

• the policing of university protests

• the policing of political protests

• advising on general animal welfare issues

• providing advice relating to environmental protests including recent advice relating to anti-fracking protests

Gavin has represented clients interviewed or charged as a result of their alleged activities including anti-fur demonstrations and hunt monitoring. This is an area of law where solicitors are instructed as a result of word of mouth and the trust that is built on previous client representation.  As a result the continued instruction of Gavin is a ringing endorsement of his abilities.

Unique flexible appointments for our clients

Although Gavin will be based in our Chesterfield office, his flexible working arrangements will bring additional benefits to our Derbyshire clients.  Gavin is happy to offer appointments with clients and their witnesses outside normal office hours and outside the office setting.

This flexibility recognises that it is not always possible for people to easily make time away from work commitments to travel to see a solicitor during normal office hours.  This service, along with his willingness to arrange appointments around our clients’ availability (such as in the evening or weekend) will further demonstrate our commitment to put our clients first.  These are arrangement are, of course, in addition to our commitment to provide 24 hour emergency advice and representation.

It may be of significance to existing or potential clients that we are not aware of any other firm of criminal solicitors in Chesterfield offering a similar service.

Attention to detail and robust defence

Gavin prides himself on his meticulous attention to detail.  His robust defence of clients on all matters makes him a formidable advocate and police station representative. Gavin is not shy to raise objections when required and forcefully protect his client’s rights at all times.

Contact Chesterfield Criminal Solicitor Gavin Haigh

If you face a police investigation or court proceedings for any offence and particularly allegations arising out of public protests protest law issues, then you can contact Chesterfield at our Chesterfield office on 01246 283000.  Alternatively you can use the form below to email your enquiry to us.