All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Many professionals are held by their regulators to a higher standard than other members of the public. Conduct which may fall well short of being criminal in nature may nonetheless excite the interest of a regulator, with the potential for censure.

In the most recent case of Diggins v Bar Standards Board [2020] EWHC 467 (Admin), a barrister failed in his challenge to a sanction being imposed in respect to an unpleasant social media post.

 

No ‘second bite of the cherry’

The court emphasised that an appeal was not a de novo exercise, allowing for another chance to litigate the same points in the hope of a different finding.

The court held:

“There is another strand to the self-restraint required of an appeal court that is relevant here. This is an appeal against a professional disciplinary Panel.  Where the Court considers on appeal a decision of a profession’s regulatory or disciplinary body it:

“…will place weight on the expertise brought to bear in evaluating how best the needs of the profession and the public should be protected” (Council for the Regulation of Healthcare Professionals v General Medical Council [2005] EWCA Civ 1356 [2005] 1 WLR 717 [78]).

In the context of sanctions imposed by regulators of the legal profession, the Court will keep in mind that the tribunal “.. comprises an expert and informed tribunal, which is particularly well placed in any case to assess what measures are J required to deal with defaulting solicitors and to protect the public interest.

Absent any error of law, the High Court must pay considerable respect to the sentencing decisions of the tribunal.

Nevertheless if the High Court, despite paying such respect, is satisfied that the sentencing decision was clearly inappropriate, then the court will interfere.””

This part of the judgment is a salutary reminder that it is all essential to get things right at the first hearing. Any professional who faces regulatory proceedings should take particular care to ensure that the solicitors and barristers instructed are sufficiently expert in this field of law.

Right to a private life?

The central ground of challenge was that the regulator had no jurisdiction to deal with disputes of this nature, with Diggins arguing that:

“…participation in a “twitter spat” was an aspect of his private life which, on the proper interpretation of the BSB’s own rules and guidance and/or as a matter of human rights law, falls wholly outside the proper scope of professional regulation.”

The court emphasised that the regulators own guidance makes very clear that transgressions in a professional’s private life may be considered. The court went on to reject a large number of ECHR human rights challenges.

Rather tellingly the court held:

“…[caselaw does not] provide any support for the further argument advanced to me by the appellant, that the Panel could not properly find against him because “Twitter is famously rude and offensive and complaining of that is like going to a Motorhead concert and complaining it is too loud”.

It is a notorious fact that many on Twitter use rude and offensive language, indeed that some engage in harassment of others, or wounding “pile-ons”.

But I have no evidence, nor is it a matter of common knowledge, that everybody on Twitter behaves in these ways.

Even if that was so, a descriptive norm of that kind could not confer a right on any individual user to post rude or offensive messages. If the argument is that every Twitter user makes a voluntary submission to behaviour of that kind, no such argument was advanced below, and I consider it to be untenable.

I see no evidential or other basis for concluding that all Twitter users consent to being treated abusively or offensively.”

Conclusion

In all probability, we have not seen the last of these challenges to the jurisdiction of a regulator to police behaviour of this type. It is, however, becoming quite clear that the courts appear to take little issue with the regulatory approach, and all professionals would be wise to reflect on how they interact on social media and other platforms.

Contact a specialist regulatory solicitor

If you are facing proceedings relating to professional conduct and regulation then please contact specialist regulatory solicitor Martin Hadley.

He will be able to provide you with advice and representation at all stages of any criminal, regulatory or disciplinary matter.

Please contact Martin on 0115 9599550 or use the contact form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Matt Hancock, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, has written to NHS staff voicing his concern in relation to the use of violence against emergency workers.  Hancock’s approach mirrors that taken last year by police chiefs who were worried about the rise in violence used towards their police officers.

Last year’s NHS Staff Survey revealed that 15% of NHS staff and 34% of ambulance trust staff had experienced physical violence.  As a consequence, the NHS, police and Crown Prosecution Service have approved a joint agreement on offences against emergency workers.

The purpose of the joint agreement is to provide a framework to set out what victims of this crime can expect and to ensure effective investigation and prosecution. The joint agreement is in relation to assault on all emergency workers and there seems to be a renewed focus on this area.

What differs from the policy towards other victims of violence?

At investigation level the agreement sets out that the Victims’ Code applies.  As a result victims will be offered the opportunity to complete an impact statement  This is the same for all victims, but there are substantial differences in other respects:

• organisational impact statement – the organisation (hospital, GP surgery, ambulance service) cam set out the impact that the crime has had on their service
• community impact statements may be submitted
• guidance on the management of potential exposure to blood-borne viruses should be considered. It advises on the risk of infection through injury of Hepatitis B, C and HIV

The decision to prosecute

The charging decision is made in the same way for all offences using a two-stage test.  The first question is whether there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction.  If the answer is yes, the second question is whether a prosecution is required in the public interest.

It is acknowledged that assaults on NHS staff are sometimes committed by those in crisis or with neurological conditions.  The CPS must take account of the level of culpability of the suspect including whether he or she was affected by any significant mental or physical health or disability.

If they were so affected, it may mean that a prosecution is not required. On the other hand, prosecutors are told that a prosecution is more likely if the offence is committed against a person who is serving the public at the time.

Challenging a decision not to investigate or prosecute is the same for NHS staff as for other victims.  An issue can be raised with the police if they decide not to proceed with an investigation or the victim’s right to review can be invoked following a CPS decision.

An important aspect of seeking our expert legal advice if you are being investigated or prosecuted for such offence is that when  appropriate we will identify cases where it is appropriate to challenge a wrongful charging decision.

This will be particularly relevant in cases where a client was suffering from mental or physical disability that could have affected their judgement.

A Seven-point plan

The agreement contains a pledge to emergency workers via a seven-point plan, which can be summarised as:

1. assaults and hate crimes will be investigated in the same way as for members of the public;
2. the Victims’ Code applies to all victims including staff and volunteers;
3. the affected member of staff should not investigate their own assault;
4. the right welfare and supervision should be offered to victims;
5. the supervisor must ensure that the head of department is informed to provide continuity of welfare support;
6. the victim is to complete a Health and Safety incident report with their supervisor;
7. to ensure a successful prosecution, the best evidence must be presented.

As can be seen, this plan tackles a perception that assaults against emergency workers could be seen as being something to be expected or tolerated as being a part of the job.

All our lawyers are trained to ensure prosecution guidance is properly applied.  We are also trained to ensure that Magistrates and Judges properly apply the sentencing guidelines for any given offence.

It is always a risk where particular types of case are given substantial publicity that courts react in an overly harsh way towards defendants.  We will ensure that the best result possible is secured on your behalf.

How can we help?

Assault on an emergency worker is more serious than common assault, carrying a sentence of up to 12 months, and as a result we are seeing more cases come before the Crown Court for sentence.

More serious assault will continue to be charges as allegations of assault occasioning actual bodily harm or wounding.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an allegation involving an emergency worker, make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

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 football related offences.

Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

Covert Filming of Sexual Activity or Voyeurism

In 2015 Emily Hunt complained to the police that she had been raped in a hotel room. She had also been filmed, naked and asleep, without her consent. Although she is entitled to anonymity, she waived that right to draw attention to her case.

The Crown Prosecution Service did not authorise any charge, either for rape or voyeurism. Emily maintained that any sexual activity was not consensual but did not challenge the Prosecution decision not to charge the man with rape.

She did, however, suggest that the decision in relation to the voyeurism charge was wrong.

Definition of voyeurism

A person commits the offence of voyeurism if:

• for the purpose of obtaining sexual gratification, he observes another person doing a private act, and
• he knows that person does not consent to being observed for his sexual gratification.

In Emily’s case, the man accepted he had filmed her “in case he wanted to masturbate at some point”.   It was also conceded that there was evidence he had filmed her without her consent.

Under the victim’s right of review procedure, Emily challenged the decision not to prosecute the man for voyeurism. The Prosecution upheld their original decision saying that a consensual sex act would involve a person observing your naked body and that the observation could extend to filming.

Judicial review of the decision

Emily applied for a judicial review of the decision, submitting that errors of law were made by the prosecution in making this decision.

In particular, it was argued that the Crown Prosecution Service wrongly treated the question of whether Emily consented to the sex as being decisive of the question of whether she was doing a private act when she was subsequently filmed naked and asleep.

The focus was wrongly on whether she had a reasonable expectation of privacy rather than whether she was doing a private act. It was also argued that it was wrong to say that non-consensual filming of a sleeping person when naked is not really different, in terms of privacy, to being observed asleep when naked.

The real issue was the correct approach to the phrase “doing a private act”.

Outcome of the review

The Court of Appeal has now ruled that anyone who films a partner, during sex, without their permission is committing the offence of voyeurism. This decision was made in the case of a man who filmed himself having sex with prostitutes. Tony Richards had argued that he was allowed to film as a bedroom could not be a private place if he was lawfully present.

Richards appealed against his conviction on two charges of voyeurism. Unusually, Emily Hunt was given permission to intervene in the hearing. She was allowed to put forward the submission that consent should be the primary issue in these cases.

Richards argued that the issue could not be consent when the place where the offence occurred was shared with another person. The test, according to him, was whether the person had a reasonable expectation of privacy. Richards accepted that filming without consent was a “betrayal of trust” but not that it was an illegal act.

On dismissing the appeal, it was said “a defendant can be guilty of an offence of voyeurism even when he is a participant (in relation to having sex) … section 67 of the Act which protects individuals against the recording of any person involved in a private act is not limited to protecting the complainant from someone not present during the act.”

The Crown Prosecution Service subsequently confirmed that they would be reviewing their position in respect of Emily’s judicial review. A spokesperson said “what constitutes a ‘private act’ for the purposes of the offence of voyeurism had never been conclusively defined by a higher court” until the case of Richards.

It was later said, by the Centre for Women’s Justice who supported Emily’s campaign, that the Crown Prosecution Service was no longer resisting the judicial review and would look again at the decision not to prosecute.

What to do if you are accused of voyeurism

Voyeurism is a serious offence that can be dealt with at the Magistrates’ Court or the Crown Court.  It carries a maximum sentence of 2 years’ imprisonment.

A conviction can also lead to notification requirements under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 and restrictions on working with children or vulnerable adults.

The consequences of a conviction can, therefore, be far reaching.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an allegation such as voyeurism, make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

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.

You can read more about how we prepare such a case for trial here.

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 football related offences.

Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

When people think about those being caught drink or drug driving, the cliche involves a man leaving a pub late at night, being seen to be driving erratically and then being stopped by the police.  Although this scenario may often be the the backdrop to an arrest for drink or drug driving, often the story is quite different.

The morning after the night before begins with a headache, followed by groans as the body and mind adjusts to the horrible thought that this is not a weekend and work beckons.

A quick shower revives the senses and off to work you go. Traffic is heavy as usual, drivers as intolerant as ever, and the rain contributes only to a sour mood amongst drivers. Then bang – a relatively minor shunt causing minimal damage to really kick off the day well.

It is, however. often this kind of minor road traffic incident that will cause traffic chaos at a peak time and attract the attention of the police with the result that there is roadside testing for drink and drugs.

 

The fact that you look great, feel fine and are not responsible for the accident will do nothing to mitigate the alcohol or drug levels in your body.  Anyone who tells you that you can confidently predict alcohol or drug levels the morning after is not telling the truth.

What happens next may make the earlier headache pale into insignificance.

An arrest, charge and court appearance resulting in a minimum period of disqualification.

Will you keep your job? What will your partner say?

 

The safest message remains ‘none for the road’.

In some cases, there are legal defences available, and we can discuss these with you.

Sometimes there are arguments to avoid a disqualification.

When a legal defence is not possible, we work hard to mitigate the sentence and get your life back on track.

The Christmas drink drive campaign 2019

Your local police force will now have in place its Christmas and New Year drink and drug driving campaign, roadside testing will increase, and officers will be extra vigilant.  You can read about the Nottinghamshire campaign here.

We hope that you do not need our services over the festive period, but if you so please be assured that we are here, on your side 24 hours a day.

Contact a drink drive specialist lawyer

If you do make a mistake and find yourself in trouble, there is a lot we can do to assist you.

In some cases the police will want to interview you about the offence.  If this is the case, whether under arrest or as a volunteer, always make sure you seek our free and independent legal advice.  You can read about the benefits here.

The police must follow complex procedures to establish a case against you.  Our lawyers will be able to analyse the evidence to ensure that the procedures have been followed.  We can successfully challenge the evidence in your case.

A road traffic solicitor can also investigate issues such as ‘laced drinks’ which can raise the opportunity to avoid disqualification.  We will also consider other ‘special reasons’ that could be raised on your behalf.  This might include the shortness of distance that was driven.

Well-presented mitigation can make a real difference to the outcome. Even where a disqualification cannot be avoided, we can often achieve a reduction in length.

Legal aid might be available dependent upon your means and the circumstances of your case.  Alternatively, you will be able to fund your case through an affordable fixed fee.

Contact one of our drink drive solicitors at your nearest office if you are being investigated by the police or taken to court as a result of the Christmas drink drive campaign.  They will, of course, be able to discuss and other driving matters that you face.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below to ask for a call about your case.

All posts by Andrew Wesley/h3>

The deadline for registering to vote for the General election 2019 has now passed.  Those who choose to vote will go to the polls on 12th December 2019 to decide the political makeup of the next parliament.

The Representation of the People Act 1983 creates a number of offences concerned with political elections and those engaged in political party management should receive detailed training in this regard.

 

But what happens if people fall foul of the law?

The guideline case in this area is Hussain [2005] EWCA Crim 1866, where the following observations were made.

Why election offences are so serious?

‘Among the most important features of the way of life in this country is, first, the fact that this country is a democracy. It has a form of government based upon the principle that, subject to limited exceptions, each individual member of the public is entitled to a single vote to elect the government of the day, whether national or local. In this process of election every vote should be of equal value. The second feature is that, although we have no reason for complacency, the government in this country (both national and local) is usually free from any form of corruption. The third feature to which we draw attention is that the principles to which we have already referred are every bit as much as important in the case of local government as they are in the case of central government.’

The danger to democracy

‘If in a democratic society the electoral system is contaminated by corruption or fraud, it will be rendered worthless. It is the responsibility of the courts and our justice system as a whole, so far as it is within the courts’ jurisdiction, to protect the country’s electoral system.

This is a responsibility to which the courts must attach the greatest of importance.’

The need for deterrent sentences

‘Having regard to the nature of those offences, it was of importance that the punishment that was passed was one which would deter others from committing offences of that sort.

Even a deterrent sentence has to be proportionate to the offence and not unjust in relation to the offender. However, a deterrent sentence is passed by the courts with the primary object of deterrence.’

Age and good character of limited mitigation, possibly aggravating the offence in some cases

‘… the circumstances of the offender, such as the fact that in this case the applicant is now aged 62 and suffers from angina, become of significantly less importance. So does the fact that hitherto he had been a leader of the community to which he belonged and that he was regarded by those in the community who knew him as being entirely estimable. Indeed the very fact that he had this reputation within the community meant that it was easier for him to commit these offences.

No doubt if his name had not been associated with the election in the way that it was, it would have been more difficult for those who were acting on his behalf to persuade people to entrust their voting papers to their custody. The applicant took advantage of members of his own community who were less educated and less able to protect themselves than the majority of the electorate in this country. They did not understand what they were doing when they handed over the papers. He used others to carry out his fraudulent intentions.

By doing so they became part of a conspiracy to undermine the electoral system. These were calculated offences.’

Actual Sentences Imposed

In the case of Hussain a sentence of 3 years 7 months was imposed for large-scale election fraud.

In Fadaka (2015) which concerned a false statement concerning candidate eligibility a suspended sentence of 12 months was quashed and 6 months immediate term imposed instead.

And finally, in Khan (2009), another fraud case in relation to ‘ghost voters’, the court commented that the appellants were wise not to appeal sentences of 42 and 54 months.

The clear message from the Court of Appeal is that election fraud offences will be treated extremely seriously and immediate custody is almost inevitable.

Contact a specialist criminal law solicitor

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an offence arising out of the General Election 2019 or any political election then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

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 football related offences.

Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.