All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>
Derby criminal defence solicitor Nick Wright
Derby crime solicitor Nick Wright recently represented a client who had been subject to a ‘postal requisition’ bringing him before Derby Magistrates’ Court for an allegation of Disorderly Conduct.
The system of postal requisition has replaced the old summons in order to commence court proceedings. Strict time limits apply to many cases.
Case commenced by postal requisition
The allegation was one that perhaps ought to have been given priority by the police. It involved an allegation from a local Member of Parliament who maintained that a vehicle had been driven past her while she was attending to her bins. The driver, as the vehicle went by, was said to have shouted ‘I hope you die’, swearing and using additional abusive language.
The complainant had the presence of mind to take the registration number of the vehicle as well as its description, and was able to describe the driver.
The police believed that the incident arose due to the MP’s political beliefs.
Admitted Presence
On arrest, Nick’s client admitted that he was the driver of the vehicle, accepted that he had been shouting, but denied that he was shouting at the MP. He denied knowing she was on the road, and stated that the shouting was during an argument and the circumstances meant that he was not guilty of the offence.
Always read the small print
There was not an opportunity for the matter to be argued at trial. As the charge could only be dealt with in the Magistrates’ Court it was subject to a 6 month time limit to start proceedings. In fact, proceedings were authorised nearly a month after this time limit expired. As a result, once Nick identified this as an issue and spoke with the prosecutor, the prosecution had no alternative but to withdraw the charge.
Contact a Derby Criminal Defence Solicitor
If you are being investigated by the police or face court proceedings then you will need a solicitor to take the time to examine all of the evidence, including whether a postal requisition has been properly issued in time.
All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>
Nottingham criminal solicitor Jameel Malik
Nottingham criminal solicitor Jameel Malik recently represented a client who had attended Central Police station as a volunteer for police interview. She had requested the duty solicitor and Jameel attended.
His client was due to be questioned in a police interview under caution as she was said to have used a Bluetooth earpiece to obtain answers from somebody outside the testing room while taking her theory test.
This behaviour, if true, would amount to the offence of attempted fraud as she had not actually passed the test. When the offending had been detected she had potentially made matters worse by running away.
The matter could have been taken seriously by the police. Such behaviour has the capability of undermining the integrity of the testing system. Jameel was aware of a case that had recently been dealt with before Nottingham Crown Court where, in similar circumstances, that offender had received a sentence of 4 months immediate custody. Details of that case can be found here.
Jameel’s client had not been in trouble with the police before. She was accepting her responsibility for the offence. She was in the unfortunate position where she had paid to sit this test seven times without success.
Following her admissions and expressions of remorse during police interview, Jameel was able to negotiate an out of court disposal for his client. She was relieved to be offered Restorative Justice.
Contact Jameel about your police interview
A police interview under caution will always be free of charge to you under the legal aid scheme. This is true whether you are under arrest or being interviewed as a volunteer. It is also true whether the interview takes place at a police station and is recorded, or in your own home and is written down.
If you know that you are due to be interviewed then you will be able to make arrangements for Jameel to attend the interview with you so that there are no delays and he can look after your interests from the start.
All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>
Chesterfield Solicitor David Gittins
Chesterfield Crime solicitor David Gittins was recently instructed by a client who faced an allegation of assault in a domestic setting. The case was heard before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court.
The case called for thorough and diligent preparation. This included the development of a complex legal argument at a very late stage. The argument resulted in the prosecution choosing not to pursue the case further. David’s client had the benefit of a not guilty verdict.
We had represented our client during the investigation stage and David conducted the case before the Magistrates’ Court.
The Allegation
In November 2016 the David’s client was at his home address with his then partner. An argument began which lasted several hours began. During the argument our client was said to have headbutted the complainant on 3 occasions and tried to bite her to the neck.
David’s client left the address and the police were called immediately by the complainant. She had a visible injury to her head.
Full Account in Interview
When spoken to by the police, our client accepted that he had been present but had a different version of events. He said that upon telling his partner during the argument that he was going to leave the property and see a friend the complainant attacked him. She pushed her head into his, and our client had to push her away so he could leave.
Chesterfield Police Station Representative Rob Lowe
He was again prevented from leaving by being pulled backwards. Our client again pushed her away fearing a further attack. He said he acted in reasonable self defence and he was in fact the victim.
There were no other witnesses to the incident, so David set out to locate information gathered during the police investigation that would strengthen his client’s case.
David obtained a copy of the photograph taken of his client on arrest. This and the custody record showed that he had no markings to his face supporting the idea that he had headbutted his partner.
Bad Character Evidence
Additionally, David attempted to secure information relating to an earlier incident from August 2016 when his client had called the police alleging that he had been assaulted. Secondly David wrote to the CPS asking for information about an incident from August 2016 when the Defendant had called the Police alleging that the complainant in this matter had assaulted him. This might support his client’s account in this case.
This information arrived very late. This meant that David had to immediately draft an application for his bad character evidence to go before the trial court. Although the prosecution responded, the response was supplied late and did not contain all of the information that it should. The hearing was adjourned to the morning of the trial.
The additional information served was previous court decisions. In fact, they did not help the prosecution. David addressed the court on the application and this case law. The court ruled in his client’s favour. As a result, David was able to ask the complainant about this earlier incident.
Perhaps knowing that David’s client was in the right, the complainant did not attend court for the trial at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court. Although the prosecution could have applied to adjourn the case, the work that David had done persuaded them not make the application. No evidence was offered and he was found not guilty.
Client Feedback
David’s client was very pleased, with this outcome, and after the hearing took the time to send David an email thanking him “for everything and the support you’ve provided in the case.”
Funding
David’s client did not have the benefit of legal aid for his case before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court. This was because his income was too high. He therefore instructed David on a private basis. David gave a realistic and affordable quote from the outset with the Client being kept informed throughout by email, phone and office appointments.
At the conclusion of the David was successful in securing a Defendant’s Costs Order meaning that David’s bill would be paid out of Central Funds by the government and cost the Defendant nothing.
Contact David Gittins for Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court
Should you wish to contact Chesterfield crime solicitor David Gittins, please telephone him at our Chesterfield office 01246 283000 or email her here.
All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>
Chesterfield crime solicitor Ben Strelley
Chesterfield crime solicitor Ben Strelley recently persuaded a District Judge that what he thought he had seen on CCTV was not correct and in doing so secured a non-custodial sentence for his client.
Ben was instructed to represent a mother and son who had travelled to Chesterfield to watch a football match. Both had been refused entry to the match so attended a local pub. Inside the pub a large fight erupted following damage being caused. Both of Ben’s clients were accused of using and threatening unlawful violence.
Ben’s clients had been represented by the us at the police station. As a result Ben knew that the incident was captured on CCTV. The Prosecution had failed to provide this to us in advance of the first hearing. Instead the disc was handed to Ben at the first hearing.
Adjournment in Interests of Justice
In order to be able to give full and proper consideration to the CCTV evidence Ben argued that his clients ought to be given the benefit of an adjournment. The allegations they faced included a suggestion that there had been kicking to victims of the violence whilst they were on the ground.
Courts are encouraged to refuse adjournments wherever possible, but Ben’s articulate application setting out how it would be in the interest of justice to adjourn ensured that the Court agreed.
Before the second hearing Ben viewed the CCTV at length before an appointment with his clients. The mother accepted the allegation in full but her son denied that he had kicked the victim. Ben, having seen the CCTV, agreed that it did not show kicking by him. As a result both clients returned to Court at the second hearing willing to enter guilty pleas on the basis of what was shown on the CCTV.
The Judge was Wrong
At Court the Judge, who viewed the CCTV, made it clear that he believed that the CCTV showed the son kicking. Whether he had or not was likely to be very important as if he had it was likely that he would receive a prison sentence.
Ben suggested to the District Judge that he was mistaken. His thorough preparation meant that he approached this issue from a position of strength as he knew he was right.
Ben went on to invite the Judge to watch the footage again so that he could have the Judge focus solely on his client. The Judge agreed and the footage was watched in Court. At the conclusion the Judge agreed with Ben. There was no kicking and he would be sentenced accordingly.
It is perhaps an indication of the strength of the advocate that Ben was prepared to argue that this Judge was simply wrong on the evidence. Ben did not hide from this potentially difficult situation. His client benefited in the end.
No Football Banning Order
The case proceeded and the Prosecution then asked the Court to consider Football Banning Orders for both involved. The Prosecution claimed that the violence was ‘football related’ and as such wished to prevent Ben’s clients from attending football matches for years to come. Ben, again was fully prepared for this.
Armed with recent case law, Ben argued that the matter was not ‘football violence’. The Judge by this time knew that Ben had a thorough grasp of the case. As he result he decided did not merit an order. As such no Football Banning Orders were imposed and the Ben’s clients were free to continue to attend football matches.
If you are under investigation by the police or face court proceedings and wish to contact Chesterfield crime solicitor Ben Strelley then please telephone our Chesterfield office on 01246 387999.
Laura’s client had first arrested in 2013, aged 69, for alleged sexual offences spanning a period of approximately 18 years from 1995 in relation to a single complainant. The police and prosecution had initially decided that there was insufficient evidence to proceed as they had also gathered evidence in support of Laura’s clients denials.
A second complainant then made sexual allegations, albeit of quite a different nature, which led Laura’s client being charged with later offences. A decision was then made that, absent any additional evidence, her client would be charged with the original allegations as well.
As a result of police enquiries, further historical allegations were made by another three complainants. These allegations dated back as far as 1972.
Prosecution Failure to Disclose
Crown Court Litigator Laura Clarson
All matters for the five complainants were tied into a single indictment and listed for trial before Derby Crown Court. It became clear during the trial that the Crown had failed to disclose a substantial amount of material relevant to the case that had the potential to assist in our client’s defence.
It was impossible to consider properly this unused material so there was no alternative but for the trial to be adjourned to start afresh nine months later.
In the meantime, the prosecution chose to offer no evidence in relation to all of the allegations apart from those arising from the original investigation which had not been prosecuted.
Detailed Cross Examination on ‘Unused Material’
In readiness, counsel Vanessa Marshall examined the additional material comprising years of medical, social services, school and counselling records. This meant that lengthy cross examination of the complainant was needed. This in turn led to a review of the case by the prosecution after this evidence had been challenged.
Not Guilty Verdicts on all Charges
The letter to Laura
The prosecution then chose to offer no further evidence against Laura’s client, who was by now aged 73, and invite not guilty verdicts. The entire process had taken three years, during which time he had suffered ill health throughout.
Laura’s client took the time to write a letter thanking her for all that she had done and the manner in which he had been treated.
Contact Laura Clarson
Defending historic allegations is always difficult, but this case demonstrates that in instructing Laura Clarson you will know that your case is being given the time and attention that it needs.
