Due to many years of under investment the criminal justice system in England and Wales is crumbling.
Things are going wrong at every level and every stage. It’s become a nightmare journey through the system for the accused, for victims and for solicitors alike.
Five problems facing the system
Increasing shortages of criminal duty solicitors
Within five years there could be areas in England and Wales where people who have been arrested won’t be able to access a duty solicitor. This means they won’t be able to get the free legal advice they’re entitled to.
For example, cases in court are often ‘double booked’, so some hearings get cancelled at the last minute. Things like this waste the accused’s and their solicitor’s time, and increase costs.
More and more courts are being closed
Defendants and witnesses are having to make unreasonably long and expensive journeys to court.
Important evidence sometimes isn’t made available until the last minute, or isn’t disclosed at all. This can mean the difference between freedom and imprisonment.
All of these problems show the criminal justice system is at breaking point. Without urgent action, it will fall apart.
The Law Society has published data which shows a looming crisis in the numbers of criminal duty solicitors working in England and Wales right now. In the future, many individuals will be left unable to access their right to a solicitor and free advice within a reasonable time, if at all.
Criminal duty solicitors – a dying breed?
Criminal duty solicitors like those at VHS Fletchers offer a vital public service. Any individual detained by the police has a right to a solicitor and this advice will always be free of charge under our legal aid contract with the government. This remains the case at any time of day, and regardless of wealth, age or nationality.
The mean average age of a criminal duty solicitor across the whole of England and Wales is now 47, and in many regions the average age is even higher.
The Law Society data highlights that in 5 to 10 years’ time there could be insufficient criminal duty solicitors in many regions, leaving individuals in need of legal advice unable to access justice.
This could have a catastrophic effect on the criminal justice system, as members of the profession retire and leave a shortage of experienced practitioners. This will impact on both access to justice and on valuable police time.
One explanation for these shortages is because criminal defence solicitors have received no fee increase since 1998. Instead, fees have been reduced and removed. Inflation has led to a significant real terms reduction. Combined with other cuts to the system including court closures, many lawyers no longer see a viable career doing this work. It is difficult to attract and retain new members of the profession.
The Law Society campaign
The Law Society is therefore calling on the Government to conduct an economic review of the long-term viability of the criminal legal aid system and to guarantee that criminal legal aid fees will rise with inflation.
For many a day trip to see a football match with friends is about more than the match itself. The journey, banter, songs, food and drink are as important as the match itself in making the day memorable. Sometimes, however, a combination of these factors can lead to our clients coming to the attention of the police. This is where our football law solicitors can help.
Chesterfield crime solicitor Kevin Tomlinson
However just because you are guilty of a crime on a day when you attended a football match does not mean that it is a football related offence. Such an argument might mean that you can avoid a football banning order with the help of our football law solicitors.
The order would ban you from attending all football matches in the UK for a minimum period of three years so their effects are far reaching.
Our client was later on a train travelling from Birmingham to Derby coming home from the game. A complaint was made that he was engaging in disorderly conduct. Police officers became involved and he was described as being drunk and shouting and swearing. It amounted to an offence contrary to Section 5 Public Order Act 1986.
Receipt of a postal requisition
The police did not arrest our client at the time but later tried to arrange a voluntary interview but our client chose not to cooperate. As a result, he simply received a postal requisition notifying him of a court date.
The case was to be heard at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court and he instructed Kevin, a keen football fan himself, to assist.
Guilty plea at Sheffield Magistrates’ Court
Kevin’s client accepted that he was guilty of the offence. As a result, in order to take advantage of the credit available, he pleaded guilty. Mitigation was put forward to persuade the Magistrates’ to impose a conditional discharge. This meant that our client would only be punished if he committed a fresh offence within the next 12 months.
In summary, if the application was successful, Kevin’s client would not have been able to attend any FA football match in the UK for three years. As a result, it is important to instruct expert football law solicitors contest any application.
In order to impose a football banning Order it must be shown that the criminal offence was “football related.” Kevin studied the evidence in the case closely and applied the case law to the circumstances of the case.
He was able to successfully argue that there was no link between the offence his client had pleaded guilty to and the football match his client had been to. As the court agreed with his argument no order was made. Kevin’s client was delighted and could continue to attend football matches without restriction.
Contact one of our football law solicitors
If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about a football related offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.
We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all football related offences.
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands
Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.
Contact
Category Archives: News
A recent case dealt with before Lincoln Crown Court alleged to involved football related violence demonstrated the ability of the expert team at VHS Fletchers to work together to secure an excellent outcome for our clients.
The case involved our team representing four clients who were part of a brawl on Lincoln High Street on the day that Lincoln City played Chesterfield Town. An important question was to be whether this was football related violence or not?
The circumstances of the offending
Police were called towards the end of the afternoon to a large fight taking place on Lincoln High Street. Around 20 males were fighting using street furniture, chairs and even metal crowd gates as weapons. These items were being thrown between the opposing parties without consideration for those not involved. Shoppers included the elderly and children who were forced to flee the violence.
How were our clients identified?
After the incident the police took steps to try and identify those involved in the offending. Lincolnshire police ask their Derbyshire colleagues to view CCTV footage and photographs. There were also national press releases. As a result, seven of those involved were prosecuted for the incident.
VHS Fletchers were instructed by four of those involved in the violence. They received our expert legal advice on both the charge of violent disorder and the football banning order applications that might follow.
Charges of violent disorder
All of the defendants were originally charged with an allegation of violent disorder. This offence carries a maximum sentence of five years in prison. Prison is usually inevitable for this charge, even on a guilty plea.
Once the case was transferred to Lincoln Crown Court we began negotiations with the prosecution to see whether a lesser charge of affray would be acceptable. These discussions were successful and as a result charges of affray were substituted instead. Although serious, the maximum sentence for affray is one of three years.
Our clients had always accepted that they were in the wrong, but it was important that they faced the correct charge and one that allowed an opportunity to avoid an immediate custodial sentence. Once the charges were amended, all four of our clients pleaded guilty.
The evidence provided was overwhelming and therefore each client was advised to enter a guilty plea knowing that there was a substantial risk of a custodial sentence.
Once we advanced mitigation on behalf of our clients, the Crown Court judge imposed a suspended prison sentence with unpaid work and financial penalties.
Had the application been successful our clients would not have been able to attend any FA match in the UK for a minimum of 3 years with additional conditions attached.
A pre-condition for imposing a football banning order is that this offence be football related violence. Having studied the evidence closely, and knowing the relevant case law in great detail, our team led by solicitor advocate Kevin Tomlinson drafted legal argument to serve on the court and prosecution.
Not football related violence
This showed through the evidence that there was no link between this offence and the football match. Instead, our clients had been in Lincoln coincidentally and had no tickets for the match or intention to go. As a result, affray was not football related violence.
The court agreed and refused the application made by the prosecution in relation to all of our clients. Our clients were understandably delighted as they could attend football matches without restriction if they wished.
Contact one of our Football law specialists
If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about a football related offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.
We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all football related offences.
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands
Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.
Contact
Category Archives: News
Nottingham based solicitor advocate Graham Heathcote was recently instructed by a client to appeal the imposition of a football banning order imposed at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court.
The History of the case
Solicitor advocate Graham Heathcote
Our client appeared before the Nottingham Youth Court for assaulting a police office in the execution of his duty and assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
This followed an incident at the bar close to Notts County’s Meadow Lane ground. This was prior to the County v Coventry League 2 match.
The bar had chosen not to exclude Coventry City supporters on that day. An hour before the match the police were called to eject some Coventry fans who were being unruly and disruptive. Door staff had been unable to cope with the hostile group in the bar, and a smoke bomb had been let off inside.
Police also entered the terrace area of the bar to eject a male who had been aggressive towards the officers themselves. He complied with a request to leave but our client had client pushed the officer and attempted to strike him.
During the struggle to arrest our client, the officer felt pain in his right finger. It was subsequently found to be broken.
Our client had entered a guilty plea in the Youth Court and as it was his first conviction received a referral order. Unfortunately the court also imposed a football banning order preventing him from attending football matches within the UK.
It did not appear, however, that this was a football related offence and as a result our client decided to appeal the decision to impose the football banning order to Nottingham Crown Court.
Advice and representation at appeal
In order to impose a football banning order it must be shown that the criminal offence was “football related.” The argument in this case was that the incident was unconnected to football. Instead it was an incident that arose upon the police attempting to remove people from a bar.
Upon a close examination of the evidence it was clear that this argument had merit. As a result, Graham Heathcote represented our client at appeal, instructed by litigator Freddie Sail.
The appeal was opposed by the prosecution. The prosecutor maintained, as they had in the Youth Court, that the criteria for a football banning order had been met. As a result it had been properly imposed.
Football banning order removed
Having considered the evidence and Graham’s representations the Crown Court judge and Magistrates agreed. The appeal was successful and the football banning order was removed.
Our client was obviously delighted and could continue to attend football matches unobstructed.
Contact one of our football law specialists
If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about a football related offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.
We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all football related offences.
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands
Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.
Contact
Category Archives: News
We have previously posted articles about our clients who have been unfortunate enough to be charged with allegations of possession of disguised weapons that, on conviction, will attract a minimum 5 year sentence. This is often a surprise to the client, and we have had to work particularly hard to avoid an immediate prison sentence.
Examples involving disguised weapons can be found here and here.
New guidance has been issued by the prosecution as to when it is appropriate to charge the offence that attracts the minimum 5 year sentence.
It had been hoped that this change would have assisted those found in possession of a combination torch and stun gun. Unfortunately, this is not the case. The charging standards have only been relaxed where, for example, as stun gun has been disguised as another weapon.
The charging guidance now contains the following:
Note on Disguised Weapons
“Firearms which are disguised as another object (such as stun guns disguised as torches or mobile phones or other innocent objects) are prohibited weapons contrary to section 5(1)(b) and 5(1A)(a). The latter attracts a mandatory minimum sentence; the former does not.
Where a stun gun is disguised as another weapon, prosecutors should always charge section 5(1)(b) unless any significant aggravating feature, as identified by R v Avis [1988] 1 Cr App R 420 CA is present. The factors in Avis are:
• What (if any) use has been made of the firearm?
• With what intention (if any) did the defendant possess or use the firearm?
• What is the defendant’s record?
Unless a significant aggravating feature is present, the mandatory minimum sentence may be arbitrary and disproportionate. Where section 5(1)(b) is charged, the Court may still pass a significant sentence. However, it can exercise its discretion at sentence where there is an absence of aggravating features which do not merit charging an offence attracting a mandatory minimum sentence.
[Additionally] Prosecutors should note that where a stun gun is disguised as another weapon, section 5(1)(b) should be charged, absent any use or intended use of the stun gun, or the commission or alleged commission at the same time or recently of other relevant offences’”.
“…The fact that the disguised stun gun in question is of limited power is not a reason for charging the lesser offence – R v McCarthy [2013] EWCA Crim. 2500.”
Note on dual purpose objects
Prosecutors should be alert to the defence contention that an object has a dual purpose and, therefore, is not a disguised firearm.
Where a case involves a dual purpose object (for example, a combined torch and stun gun), unless it is immediately apparent that an object contains a firearm, then it is a disguised weapon and should be charged as such, (section 5(1A) Firearms Act 1968). Failure to do so would deprive the judge of all available sentencing options, including the minimum sentence.
Prosecutors should liaise with the officer in connection with a defendant’s basis of plea in all cases involving objects described as ‘dual purpose’.
The charging standards make clear that there can be flexibility in whether a charge attracting a minimum sentence is brought by the prosecution. Experience of negotiating on offence and plea is an important skill that we are able to bring to your case.
As a result it is best to take advantage of our free and independent legal advice in police interview as it is easier for us to make a difference in your case if instructed at an early stage.
Even in cases where you haven’t instructed us in the police station, we will still be happy to receive your instructions after interview or if the case proceeds to court.
Again, legal aid is likely to be available for your court case and we will advise you fully about all of your funding options.
Prior to his sacking, the former Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson suggested a 10-year time limit or Statute of Limitations on the prosecution of soldiers accused of murder during military engagement.
This proposal was in response to reports that British soldiers may face prosecution over deaths during the Northern Ireland troubles in the 1970s and 1980s.
So, what prosecution time limits currently apply in England and Wales?
Offences can be categorised into three groups:
Summary only offences – offences that can only be tried in the magistrates’ court.
Indictable offences (or either-way offences) – offences that may be tried either in the magistrates’ court or the crown court.
Indictable only offences – offences that may only be tried in the crown court.
Summary Only Offences
In general, proceedings must be commenced within six months of the criminal act that is being complained of.
There are however many exceptions to this rule. These exceptions in particular will apply to the following types of offence:
They allow proceedings to be commenced much later, and in some cases as long as three years after the offence was committed, where certain conditions are met.
There is a great deal of case law concerning the calculation of time limits and it is common to see offences commenced in breach of the rules. When these breaches are identified this will bring the prosecution to a halt.
With the new Single Justice Procedure for road traffic, railway and other offences we can see an alarming number of cases being charged in breach of statutory time limits.
If you have any doubts then please check with us immediately.
All other cases
In relation to indictable and indictable only cases the starting point is that there is no time limit in bringing the prosecution.
It is very common to see offences, particularly sexual offences, prosecuted a great many years after the events complained of.
Alleged historical sexual and other offences can create significant difficulties for defendants so many years after the alleged events. It can, for example, make defences such as alibi all the more difficult to establish.
As time passes witness memory and recollection will fade. False accounts can seem true. Mistakes in memory will be made. Important evidence can disappear.
The response of the Court of Appeal to these defence complaints is that they are a ‘matter for the jury’. The trial judge can deal with them by directions to the jury as to the problems created. A jury should only convict if it is sure.
What can the defence do?
Wherever possible we will look to explore other appropriate avenues at trial to redress the balance.
This may take the form of an application to exclude evidence. Alternatively, in some cases, an application can be made to bring the case to a halt. This is called ‘staying proceedings’. To continue to allow the prosecution would amount to an ‘abuse of process’.
Is an abuse of process argument easy to win?
Unfortunately an abuse of process argument is notoriously difficult to win. This leads many to believe that they are therefore mostly pointless. As a result, many won’t bother to make them at all.
This is not a strategy that we believe in, and we will always advance arguments where there is a prospect of success.
In Attorney-General’s Reference (No 1 of 1990) [1992] QB 630 the court held:
“Firstly, it is for the defence to prove, on the balance of probabilities, that the continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of the Court and should, therefore, be stayed.
Secondly, stays of proceedings in such circumstances should be the exception rather than the rule, and where the application for a stay is based on delay a stay should be an exception rather than the rule even if the stay could be said to be unjustifiable. Still more rarely should a stay be imposed in the absence of any fault on the part of the complainant. No stay should be imposed unless the defendant shows, on the balance of probabilities, that because of the delay he will suffer serious prejudice to the extent that no fair trial can be held.
The third proposition of law that seems to me to arise from the authorities is that the judge considering an application to stay of this kind may have regard to his powers to exclude evidence, to give appropriate directions to the jury about the delay, and in particular to give directions to the jury about the difficulties which the delay has presented to the defence.
The fourth relevant proposition of law, as it seems to me, is that the judge may also take into account the extent to which a prosecution case depends on contemporaneous documents. The more it does so, the more difficult it will be for a defendant to establish that an indictment will be stayed.
Fifthly, where delay results from the reticence of an alleged victim in reporting an allegation of sexual abuse, one is entitled to adopt an understanding attitude towards the difficulties that can be encountered by such witnesses in making complaints about sexual abuse.”
A seemingly more liberal approach was taken in R (Flaherty) v City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court [2008] where a delay of 2 years due to the inactivity of the prosecution during enforcement proceedings was held to amount to an abuse of process.
Separately in Ali v CPS [2007] a delay of 7 years was sufficient to support a stay for abuse where documentary evidence pertinent to the complainant’s credibility had been lost.
Instruct a specialist in criminal law
We can begin to advise you as to the potential effect of delay in your case as early as in your interview with the police. We cannot stress enough that our legal advice and representation is always free to you if you are interviewed. This remains true whether you are under arrest or being interviewed voluntarily.
Our specialist criminal lawyers can advise you on whether you have a defence, and help you put that defence forward, which may be particularly difficult where a number of years have passed. We will advise you on the prospects of success and instructing any experts that may help along the way.
As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about a criminal offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.
Imagine the unimaginable – you have been convicted of a crime that you didn’t commit!
Your trial lawyers have told you that there is no hope of an appeal. You can’t afford more legal advice from a criminal law specialist so you decide to look for a cheaper alternative.
McKenzie friends – cheaper and just as effective?
Surely there must be someone who can help? Perhaps that friend from university who studied law? Or someone who’s website says they are “cheaper than a solicitor or barrister, but just as effective”?
Mr Wright was injured in 2004 when three plastic bags were left inside him during an operation. He hired a “McKenzie Friend”, George Rusz, to support him during his claim. He ended up with only £20,000 in damages from the NHS.
To make matters worse he had to pay £75,000 in costs to the NHS because of the incompetent way Mr Rusz had conducted the case. This meant that despite winning he had to pay out £55,000.
Fortunately, Mr Wright recovered those costs and the damages he should have received had his case been dealt with properly after he sued Mr Rusz for giving negligent advice. He was awarded £336,759 in total. This finally came fifteen years after his injuries.
There is a risk that he may be out of pocket a lot longer. If Mr Rusz can’t, or won’t, pay it could be years before he sees the money, if ever.
The consequences of poor and unregulated advice
If you were to use a McKenzie Friend, or any unqualified person, in conducting a criminal appeal the consequences might be worse than a financial loss. The Court of Appeal has the power to order, in appeals without merit, that some time already served should not count towards your sentence. You may also face a hefty claim for prosecution costs.
McKenzie Friends may have a legitimate and useful purpose when they stick to their original purpose and role – providing moral support, taking notes, and giving advice in court – and do it competently.
Before instructing a person to assist with your case you will want to ensure that they are properly regulated and insured to avoid the problems created for Mr Wright. If in doubt, check it out.
Choose to instruct a specialist in criminal law and proceedings
A common misconception that may drive potential clients towards the use of McKenzie friends is publicity about legal costs and the availability of legal aid.
VHS Fletchers – Specialist criminal solicitors
We cannot stress enough that our legal advice and representation is always free to you if you are interviewed by the police. This remains true whether you are under arrest or having a voluntary interview.
Our specialist criminal lawyers can advise you on whether you have a defence, and help you put that defence forward, advising on prospects of success and instructing experts to help along the way.
As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about a criminal offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.
In a case involving an advice on appeal from the Crown Court legal aid may be available to provide initial advice and take the matter forward where there are arguable grounds.
A recent news story about the Gosport War Memorial Hospital highlighted the importance of pharmacists and their regulated staff seeking independent legal advise if being interviewed by the police.
The inquiry findings are being considered by the CPS and they will decide whether or not the police should instigate any investigation.
This decision following the inquiry highlights the very difficult position that pharmacists can find themselves in. The report reminds us of the case that involved Dr Harold Shipman which led to subsequent proceedings before the Royal Pharmaceutical Society by pharmacist Ghislaine Brant.
Questions raised about pharmacists’ actions
The media have been quick to raise questions as to the actions of the pharmacy staff at the Gosport War Memorial Hospital. They have queried the role that they may have played in the dispensing and supply of the high level of painkillers apparently featuring in this case. The suggestion has been made that the pharmacists employed at the time showed little regard for the supply of controlled drugs to patients.
Whilst this is clearly a tragic situation, it should not be forgotten that pharmacists are professional people undertaking extremely important work on behalf of the community. They respond to prescriptions received from doctors and make judgements prior to their decision to dispense and supply medications based on the limited information before them.
Some years down the line it may be difficult to see what, if any, documentary evidence exists to help the pharmacist explain their actions at the time. This obviously makes matters more difficult for a pharmacist to defend.
In such circumstances legal advice will make a significant difference to the outcome of a case.
Free and Independent legal advice is available for pharmacists
Cases alleging criminal liability against pharmacists or their staff are always likely to be complex and require sensitivity as there will often have been a death.
Our specialist lawyers can advise you on the evidence in the case, whether you have a defence, and help you put that defence forward. We will be able to advise you on the prospects of success and navigating a successful path through what can be a long and stressful investigation and court process. We will also be mindful of the potential regulatory impact of any adverse finding in your case. We are able to provide you with advice in relation to such proceedings.
As a result, if you are a pharmacist and are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you on a voluntary basis about any criminal offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.
Please contact our regulatory defence expert Martin Hadley on 0115 9599550 or by email here.
Alternatively you can use the contact form below:
Contact
Category Archives: News
In criminal practice and procedure, you might think that the humble adjournment is a relatively simple and straightforward matter, but you would be wrong.
A little like buses, they are never available when you want one. However, when you don’t want a case delayed the court always appears happy to work against you.
In reality, the humble adjournment is now a complex process, and only a mastery of the relevant principles will ensure the best outcome for your case.
The wise advocate is armed with a detailed chronology and will be ready to deploy this information without notice on an unsuspecting opponent. All relevant facts will have been gathered and a detailed submission will ensure the best prospects of success.
On occasion, it will be down to a client to assist. If for example, you cannot attend court due to illness or another unexpected matter arising, your solicitors will ensure that you are aware of the detailed information that needs to be provided.
The case law in relation to adjournments is well known, or at least ought to be. In Crown Prosecution Service v Picton, the High Court detailed the factors that a court ought to focus on:
A decision whether to adjourn is a decision within the discretion of the trial court. An appellate court will interfere only if very clear grounds for doing so are shown.
Magistrates should pay great attention to the need for expedition in the prosecution of criminal proceedings; delays are scandalous; they bring the law into disrepute; summary justice should be speedy justice; an application for an adjournment should be rigorously scrutinised.
Where an adjournment is sought by the prosecution, magistrates must consider both the interest of the defendant in getting the matter dealt with, and the interest of the public that criminal charges should be adjudicated upon, and the guilty convicted as well as the innocent acquitted. With a more serious charge the public interest that there be a trial will carry greater weight.
Where an adjournment is sought by the accused, the magistrates must consider whether, if it is not granted, he will be able fully to present his defence and, if he will not be able to do so, the degree to which his ability to do so is compromised.
In considering the competing interests of the parties the magistrates should examine the likely consequences of the proposed adjournment, in particular its likely length, and the need to decide the facts while recollections are fresh.
The reason that the adjournment is required should be examined and, if it arises through the fault of the party asking for the adjournment, that is a factor against granting the adjournment, carrying weight in accordance with the gravity of the fault. If that party was not at fault, that may favour an adjournment. Likewise, if the party opposing the adjournment has been at fault, that will favour an adjournment.
The magistrates should take appropriate account of the history of the case, and whether there have been earlier adjournments and at whose request and why.
Lastly, of course the factors to be considered cannot be comprehensively stated but depend upon the particular circumstances of each case, and they will often overlap. The court’s duty is to do justice between the parties in the circumstances as they have arisen.
What could possibly go wrong with a simple adjournment?
In a recent case of Pari-Jones v Crown Prosecution Service the following facts emerged:
‘On the morning of the trial, the legal adviser to the Magistrates’ Court received two emails from the defence solicitor, which were written in Welsh and were translated and presented to the court. The first email was sent at 9.23am. The solicitor stated that he was acting for the defendant and that she was a lady approaching 80 years old. It was the first listing for trial, and the criminal damage related to a neighbour dispute.
The magistrates were told that the defendant was very concerned regarding the weather, because it was freezing around her house and the road, and she had no electricity. She was living by herself with no close family. The solicitor further wrote that he was stuck in his home, which was in Pwllheli, and that it was freezing hard. He said he was a distance away from the main road, which had been gritted, and although he could leave his house, he was not feeling comfortable in venturing out.’
Almost unbelievably the court refused the defence adjournment and the defendant was convicted in her absence. The magistrates’ admitted to having considered no case law at all!
So, what seems to be an unanswerable request for a simple adjournment, in the wrong hands, can go terribly wrong. That is why we train all of our advocates to never take an application for granted and ensure the best advocacy is always deployed on your behalf.
How we can assist
We have a team of highly trained and dedicated solicitors. Unfortunately you’ll see from the facts of the case set out above that the Magistrates don’t always do what to the bystander should be obvious.
