Category Archives: News

The Single Justice Procedure (“SJP”) is designed to enable magistrates’ courts to deal with minor offences more efficiently, while still ensuring rigorous, open and fair justice. Whether those aims are in fact met is the subject of some intense debate, with a number of high-profile journalists consistently exposing weaknesses in the system.

535,000 cases were heard by magistrates via the Single Justice Procedure in 2020.

Problems have been raised with the transparency of the procedure and the unfairness of some of the outcomes have been highlighted.

How does it work?

SJP was introduced by the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2015. It allows prosecutors – who decide whether a case should be taken through the procedure – to deal with cases involving adult defendants accused of lesser offences that cannot result in a prison sentence, such as speeding, driving without insurance, TV license evasion and train fare evasion.

Defendants receive a notice containing the charge by post, with a statement setting out the facts of the offence and guidance on what steps to take, including their right to a lawyer. They have the option to plead guilty by post or online, or ask for a court hearing. There must be a hearing if they want to plead not guilty, but defendants sometimes ask for a hearing to plead guilty, for example if they want to argue against a driving ban.

If they plead guilty or do not respond within the 21-day time limit, their case will be dealt with through the SJP. If they plead not guilty or ask for a court hearing, the case goes to a hearing in open court. No defendant can be dealt with via the SJP against their will.

A single magistrate conducts SJP, advised by a professional lawyer dealing with the case on paper. There’s no prosecutor or defendant present. They can deal with the case at any time, rather than on a specific date.

The same law and principles apply to trials in a single justice procedure as a traditional trial. The prosecution must prove their case beyond reasonable doubt and their written evidence must satisfy the same rules as evidence in a trial in open court.

How was the Single Justice Procedure expanded?

From 4 January 2023, prosecutors can deal with non-imprisonable cases involving companies without the need to go to court.

For companies, non-imprisonable cases are for lesser offences, such as:

• excess vehicle weight
• lack of or incorrect operator’s licence
• tachograph offences
• failure to give identification of a driver

SJP will be the same for companies as it is for individuals. The decision as to whether to prosecute a company using SJP or in court is decided by the prosecutor.

As with all SJP cases, defendants can still choose to have their case heard in a court. They can also submit a plea on paper, rather than electronically, where needed.

When a company is a defendant, the plea and means forms must be signed by either a:

• company secretary
• company director
• company solicitor

We recommend that any individual or company facing prosecution take early legal advice to secure the best outcome.

Contact one of our expert criminal lawyers

 We have offices across the East Midlands.  Should you receive paperwork relating to a court hearing you can find your nearest office here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

Category Archives: News

Newly published research suggests that pre-recorded evidence in chief and cross-examination, often referred to as “section 28 evidence”, may be more advantageous to the accused that live evidence given in court before a jury. Conviction rates are reported to be 10% lower when this type of evidence is used (and up to 20% lower in rape cases).

In the 7-year period June 2016 -June 2023, s28 recordings were used in 4392 cases, involving 4645 defendants and 28793 charges.

Key findings of the research

Contrary to suggestions made early on in the piloting of section 28, the existence of a s28 recording does not lead to more guilty pleas.

In fact a s28 recording is associated with fewer guilty pleas. The guilty plea rate in section 28 cases in 2016 to 2023 was 10%. This represents the percentage of guilty pleas on all charges in all pre-recorded evidence cases, and is the lowest guilty plea rate in the Crown Court.

The overall jury conviction rate on charges where this evidence was used is 61%. This shows that juries convict more often than acquit when this evidence is used. This analysis demonstrates that the view expressed in the 2023 Ministry of Justice section 28 Process Evaluation, that it would be impossible to know whether s28 evidence impacted juror decision-making or outcomes, is incorrect.

The jury conviction rate was almost 10% lower when pre-recorded evidence was used (61%) compared to when it was not used (70%), and the hung jury rate was 3 times higher with section 28 cases (2.3%) than without this evidence. (0.7%).

This lower conviction rate is regardless of:

• whether the s28 witness is a child/vulnerable or an adult/intimidated,
• whether the s28 witness is female or male, or
• whether the offence is a sexual offence or a non-sexual offence.

In relation to rape offences in particular, jury conviction rates when s28 evidence is used are substantially lower for all types of rape offence, whether for adult or child rape offences.

In most instances, the jury conviction rate for rape offences is 20% lower when the complainants’ cross examination is pre-recorded compared to when the complainant’s cross examination is not pre-recorded.

The findings that jury conviction rates are consistently and substantially lower for all offences when section 28 evidence is used is very strong correlational evidence that juries experience pre-recorded cross examination differently than they do other forms of live cross examination.

The lower jury conviction rates with s28 suggest an “inequality of arms” between the main prosecution witness and defence witnesses in cases with s28 prerecorded cross examination. That is likely to be especially the case between the defendant and the main prosecution witness if the defendant chooses to give evidence live in a s28 case while all of the main witness’s evidence has been pre-recorded (evidence in chief recorded under s27 and cross-examination/re-examination pre-recorded under s28).

What influences jury decision-making in these cases?

• No comparability between main prosecution witness and other witnesses including the defendant. The s28 witness is likely to be the only witness in a case where no evidence is presented live to the jury (either in court with or without a screen or via a remote link).
• Timing of the main prosecution witness evidence. The evidence of the main witness for the prosecution is presented first; it is the first evidence a jury will see/hear; it will all be presented by video playback (twice); all other witness are likely to appear in person and appear after the witness with all pre-recorded evidence.
• Evidence structured differently for s28 witnesses from any other witness. This includes (1) the s27 ABE evidence in chief recording that has to serve a dual purpose of an investigative tool for police at the start of a case and evidence in chief to a jury at the end and (2) often more limited and formalised cross examination when s28 is used.
• Disjointed nature of evidence in chief and cross examination. This may arise for several reasons: because the ABE is primarily recorded for police evidence gathering purposes and not specifically for trial evidence purposes; because the s28 style of presentation and questioning is different from ABE and also different from other in-court cross examination of other witnesses; because the witness is likely to look and sound different in the s28 recording than in the s27 ABE recording given the differences in recording location, set up and time.
• Poor quality of pre-recorded evidence. This may apply to both s27 ABE (evidence in chief) and s28 (cross-examination) evidence.
• Poor quality of playback equipment in court. This can include poor audio (necessitating written transcripts for the jury and resulting in the jury looking at the transcript and not the witness), screens too far away, images too small within screens, etc., and may apply to either or both s27/ABE and s28 evidence.
• Inherently weaker cases use s28. It is also a possibility that s28 is used in cases where the evidence needed for conviction is weaker than in cases that do not use s28, and this is what is producing lower jury conviction rates in s28 compared with non s28 cases.

Conclusion

The authors of the research argue that:

‘…it would be prudent for the police and CPS to routinely advise witnesses of the lower jury conviction rate when pre-recorded cross examination is used. That way witnesses, especially adult witnesses that would be capable of giving live evidence (either in court with or without screens or via live link), will be empowered to make their own informed decision about which if any special measures they require and wish to use in order to give their evidence.’

Contact us for pre-recorded evidence cases

Pre-recorded evidence is mainly used in Crown Court trials.  Seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity will allow us to provide advice to you about the law and the evidence in either a police investigation or a prosecution.

If you have been interviewed by the police and face court proceedings we can make a real difference to the outcome of your case.

Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

Examples of how we will prepare your jury trial can be read here.

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Category Archives: News

Mr Bates vs. The Post Office – the story so far

The Post Office Horizon affair has been described as one of the UK’s most widespread miscarriages of justice. It has been a long, complicated and contested saga, involving a campaign for justice, various court cases, compensation schemes, and currently a public inquiry.

The recent docu-drama on ITV has focused public attention upon the scandal.

Beginning in 1999, a number of postmasters (who run individual post offices) experienced difficulties with the Horizon Post Office computer system. The system had faults which showed false shortfalls on the accounts of postmasters. Because of the shortfalls reported by Horizon, some postmasters were suspended or had their contracts terminated, and others were prosecuted, convicted, and imprisoned (for example, for false accounting and fraud).

In 2016, a group of postmasters used a group litigation order (GLO) to take legal action against the Post Office for damages relating to the consequences from the faulty Horizon system. Following rulings from the High Court in the Bates vs The Post Office High Court case, the Post Office settled.

Post Office has identified a total of 700 convictions in cases it prosecuted between 1999 and 2015 in which Horizon computer evidence might have featured.

The total number of all overturned convictions as of 3 January 2024 is 93. This includes five cases in which Post Office was not the prosecutor.

More than £32.4 million has been paid in compensation to date, including 30 full and final settlements.

Convictions data (as of 8 January 2024)

For whatever reason, some 500 or more victims of this appalling scandal have yet to have their convictions overturned. Whilst some may well be guilty of theft or other offences, it is generally accepted that the vast majority were not.

Understandably, many people may wish to forget this period in their lives, in part perhaps due to a deep mistrust of the criminal justice system.

The slow pace of providing justice for the postmasters increases the harm that has been caused, and some are calling for more radical measures, including an Act of Parliament to wipe convictions from the record.

If you are affected by this scandal and wish to discuss your legal options, then please do not hesitate to get in touch.

Contact an expert criminal defence lawyer to advise on appeal

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Category Archives: News

At VHS Fletchers, we recognise the key to providing a good service to our clients is being able to work as a team and provide a quick and reliable service.

Our ability to work as a team was certainly put to the test by our Derby criminal lawyers when they went to Make Your Escape, the immersive escape room experience in Derby.   As part of the Derby office Christmas celebrations they took on the challenge of the ‘Spellbound’ escape room with a difficulty rating of 5 out of 5.

According to the escape room staff, this was one of the most difficult rooms in the Midlands to escape from.   No other team had managed to negotiate the various clues and spells to escape on that day.

Our Derby lawyers Denney Lau, Nicola Hunter, Sarah Green, Georgia Collins, Chloe Wright, Siobhan Moore and Patrick Fisher and the team managed to escape in a record time of 46 mins 45 seconds, leaving nearly 15 minutes to spare.  On the night our team was supplemented by Dan Church, who had recently left employment with us to return to the independent bar.

There was no better way to illustrate the team spirit that can be found at our Derby office and their fast thinking in a difficult and pressured situation.  You’ll agree that the ability to think on your feet is a key attribute to successful legal representation.

Contact one of our Derby criminal lawyers

Now that they are free to continue to provide 24 hour advice and representation at police stations and at court, should you require our services than contact details can be found here.

Our advice and assistance in police interview will always be free of charge to you, and legal aid is often available for Magistrates’ and Crown Court representation.  We can assist you with application.

Alternatively, to contact us, you can use the form below:

Category Archives: News

Juror Bias?

Any avid fan of American courtroom drama will be familiar with the idea of lawyers using ingenious methods to try and select a favourable jury panel. In England and Wales, the scope for objection is minimal, and in most cases, the jurors chosen to sit will remain on the case until it is over.

Many defendants may question the potential for juror bias in situations where the type of crime being tried has impacted a juror.

R v Skeete

This issue arose in a recent Court of Appeal case of R v Skeete when the jury sent a note to the Judge in these terms:

“There is a concern from a member of the jury that two other members of the jury have close personal experience of sexual assault and rape – and whether this has influenced their verdict. Is this a concern?”

The judgment records the following:

“…[the Judge] heard full argument from both sides in relation to the application by Ms Thomas for discharge of the entire jury. Her argument in summary was: the note sent on the afternoon of 20 January indicated the possibility of bias on the part of one or more jurors; it would be essential to establish the facts in relation to such bias were the trial to continue; that could not be done since the jury were in retirement and, on the face of it, had reached a verdict; the only safe course was to discharge the jury.

The prosecution submitted that discharge of the jury without any further step being taken was inappropriate. Rather, the jury should be given further directions to ensure that they decided the case only on the evidence.”

In this case, the Judge declined to discharge the jury.  The defendant was subsequently convicted.

The Court of Appeal decided that:

1. On the face of it the note was penned by a spokesperson – possibly the person who was to deliver the verdict – reporting the position in relation to other members of the jury.
2. Its natural meaning was that, at some point during the jury’s deliberations, two members of the jury had explained that they had close personal experience of sexual assault and rape.
3. A third member of the jury had expressed a concern that this experience could have influenced the verdict of the two members of the jury.
4. This concern was not expressed in terms of any direct assertion that it had led to an influence nor was the nature of the supposed influence explained.
5. The jury note in this instance did not make any direct assertion of bias. It raised a concern that, in a case where the allegation was rape, the personal experience of jurors might have influenced their view of the case. The concern was expressed in vague and imprecise terms.
6. The evidence was that two members of the jury had particular personal experiences. The fact that they mentioned them at some point when they were trying an allegation of rape of itself does not indicate bias. The jury note did not provide evidence that jurors were not staying true to their oaths. Rather, it expressed a generalised concern of one juror in the light of what the other jurors had revealed of their personal experience.

In conclusion, the court ruled that:

“In our view the facts as presented to the judge did not require him to discharge the entire jury.”

In so finding, the appeal against conviction was rejected.

Seek our expert advice on Crown Court trials

Seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity will allow us to provide advice to you about the law and the evidence in either a police investigation or a prosecution.

If you have been interviewed by the police and face court proceedings we can make a real difference to the outcome of your case.

Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

Examples of how we will prepare your jury trial can be read here.

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Category Archives: News

The Nationality and Borders Act 2022 created a new illegal entry offence contrary to section 24(D1) Immigration Act 1971.  The provision states that a person who:

• requires entry clearance under the immigration rules, and
• knowingly arrives in the United Kingdom without a valid entry clearance,

commits an offence.

The offences created by the 2022 Act modify existing offences.  There has already been a steady stream of people prosecuted for the offence under s 24(D1), which deals with people entering the United Kingdom via “small boats”.

At the present time there is no definitive sentencing guideline for an illegal entry offence.  It carries a maximum penalty of 4 years’ imprisonment.

R v Ginar

The recent Court of Appeal case of R v Ginar established the following principles:

• The statutory maximum sentence for this new offence is four years’ imprisonment. So too is the maximum sentence for an offence under section 24(B1) of the 1971 Act of knowingly entering the United Kingdom without leave. Before the amendment, the maximum penalty for the predecessor of that offence was six months’ imprisonment.
• It is apparent that Parliament regarded that previous level of sentence as insufficient, both for the existing offence of entering without leave and for the new offence of arriving without a valid entry clearance. The four-year maximum is also longer than some other offences which may be committed in an immigration and asylum context.
• The present offence is inherently less serious than an identity document offence of the kind for which the court in R v Kolawole [2004] EWCA Crim 3047 indicated as attracting a sentence in the range of 12 to 18 months, even on a guilty plea and even for a person of previous good character.
• The predominant purpose of sentencing in cases of this nature will generally be the protection of the public. Deterrence can carry only limited weight as a distinct aim in the sentencing of those who have travelled as passengers in a crossing such as that upon which the applicant embarked. The circumstances of those who commit offences of that kind, as opposed to those who organise them, will usually be such that they are unlikely to be deterred by the prospect of a custodial sentence if caught.
• The following considerations are relevant as to culpability and harm.

There is legitimate public concern about breaches or attempted breaches of border control, and this type of offence, which is prevalent, will usually result in significant profit to organised criminals engaged in people smuggling.

A key feature of culpability inherent in the offence, save in very exceptional circumstances, is that the offender will know that he is trying to arrive in the UK in an unlawful manner: if it were otherwise, he would take the cheaper and safer alternative route which would be available to him.

The harm inherent in this type of offence is not simply the undermining of border control but also, and importantly, the risk of death or serious injury to the offender himself and to others involved in the attempted arrival, the risk and cost to those who intercept or rescue them, and the potential for disruption of legitimate travel in a busy shipping lane.

• The seriousness of this type of offence is such that the custody threshold will generally be crossed and that an appropriate sentence, taking into account the inherent features but before considering any additional culpability or harm features, any aggravating and mitigating factors and any credit for a guilty plea, will be of the order of 12 months’ imprisonment.
• Culpability will be increased if the offender plays some part in the provision or operation of the means by which he seeks to arrive in the United Kingdom, for example by piloting a vessel rather than being a mere passenger; or if he involves others in the offence, particularly children; or if he is seeking to enter in order to engage in criminal activity (for example by joining a group engaged in modern slavery or trafficking). Culpability will be reduced if the offender genuinely intends to apply for asylum on grounds which are arguable.
• Consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors must of course be a case-specific matter, but the following may commonly arise and will call for either an upwards or downwards adjustment of the provisional sentence. The offence will be aggravated by relevant previous convictions, by a high level of planning going beyond that which is inherent in the attempt to arrive in the United Kingdom from another country, and by a history of unsuccessful applications for leave to enter or remain or for asylum. Even if the previous attempts did not involve any criminal offence, the history of previous failure makes it more serious that the offender has now resorted to an attempt to arrive without valid entry clearance. The weight to be given to that factor will of course depend on the circumstances of the case.
• The offence will be mitigated by an absence of recent or relevant convictions, good character, young age or lack of maturity, mental disorder or learning disability, or the fact that the offender became involved in the offence due to coercion or pressure.

Cases of this nature will often have powerful features of personal mitigation, to which appropriate weight must be given on a fact-specific basis. The circumstances which are relied upon as arguable grounds for claiming asylum, such as the offender seeking to escape from persecution and serious danger, are likely also to mitigate the offence of arriving in the United Kingdom without a valid entry clearance.

Some offenders may have been misled as to what would await them in this country if they paid large sums of money to the criminals who offered to arrange their transport. Some may have suffered injury or come close to drowning in crossing in a dangerously overcrowded vessel. It will be for the sentencer to evaluate what weight to give to circumstances of that nature in a particular case.

Instruct an expert in defending an illegal entry offence

Seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity will allow us to provide advice to you about the law and the evidence in either a police investigation or a prosecution.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any criminal allegation including an illegal entry offence make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.  We will be present in your interview to advise through the investigation stage.

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 types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Category Archives: News

Hey Siri – What’s the answer?

On occasion, Siri or a Google search may well be able to answer a legal query.  For this to be possible, the end-user needs to know whether the information online was accurate when first posted.  Secondly, does it remain correct law now?

As criminal lawyers, we spend years learning the skills necessary to carry out proper and comprehensive legal research using sophisticated legal resources.

The latest research tool to emerge is ChatGPT.   This is more than a mere search engine.  Through advances in Artificial Intelligence it might offer quicker and cheaper ways for people to search for legal answers to legal questions.

Early results are not promising, however.  Recent cases in the USA and England have shed light on apparent dangers of relying on such Artificial Intelligence.

Caselaw invented by artificial intelligence

A lady called Felicity Harber got involved in a legal dispute with the taxman.  During the court case, in which she represented herself,  she used ChatGPT to assist her in fighting her claim.

She supplied 9 cases, along with a summary, all of which were said to support her legal argument.  Mrs Harber said that the cases in the Response had been provided to her by “a friend in a solicitor’s office” whom she had asked to assist with her appeal. Mrs Harber did not have more details of the cases.  In particular she did not have the full text of the judgments or any reference numbers.

The Tribunal told the parties that they had looked at the FTT website and other legal websites.  It had been unable to find any of the cases in the Response. The Tribunal asked Mrs Harber if the cases had been generated by an Artificial Intelligence system, such as ChatGPT.  Mrs Harber said this was “possible”.  She then moved quickly on to say that she couldn’t see that it made any difference, as there must have been other FTT cases in which the Tribunal had decided that a person’s ignorance of the law and/or mental health condition provided a reasonable excuse.

The Tribunal made two important findings of fact in relation to this point:

• That the cases in the Response are not genuine FTT judgments but have been generated by an Artificial Intelligence system such as ChatGPT.
• That Mrs Harber was not aware that the cases in the Response were fabricated, and did not know how to locate or check case law authorities by using the FTT website, BAILLI or other legal websites.

The findings of the tribunal

The Tribunal held:

Although we have accepted that Mrs Harber did not know the AI cases were not genuine, we reject her submission that this did not matter because the Tribunal had decided other reasonable excuse cases on the basis of ignorance of the law and/or mental health issues. We instead agree with Judge Kastel [who ruled in a similar case in the United States], who said on the first page of his judgment (where the term “opinion” is synonymous with “judgment”) that:

“Many harms flow from the submission of fake opinions. The opposing party wastes time and money in exposing the deception. The Court’s time is taken from other important endeavors. The client may be deprived of arguments based on authentic judicial precedents. There is potential harm to the reputation of judges and courts whose names are falsely invoked as authors of the bogus opinions and to the reputation of a party attributed with fictional conduct. It promotes cynicism about the legal profession and the…judicial system. And a future litigant may be tempted to defy a judicial ruling by disingenuously claiming doubt about its authenticity.”

We acknowledge that providing fictitious cases in reasonable excuse tax appeals is likely to have less impact on the outcome than in many other types of litigation, both because the law on reasonable excuse is well-settled, and because the task of a Tribunal is to consider how that law applies to the particular facts of each appellant’s case. But that does not mean that citing invented judgments is harmless. It causes the Tribunal and HMRC to waste time and public money, and this reduces the resources available to progress the cases of other court users who are waiting for their appeals to be determined. As Judge Kastel said, the practice also “promotes cynicism” about judicial precedents, and this is important, because the use of precedent is “a cornerstone of our legal system” and “an indispensable foundation upon which to decide what is the law and its application to individual cases.”

In this case it may be that Mrs Harber was treated leniently due to the tribunal acceptance of her apparently innocent mistake.  One might expect more severe consequences in the future.

Unsurprisingly, Mrs Harber lost her case.

Don’t leave important legal matters to chance – always consult an expert lawyer at the first opportunity.

Let us help rather than rely on Artificial Intelligence

Seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity will allow us to provide advice to you about how the law and the evidence in either a police investigation or a prosecution.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any criminal allegation make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.  We will be present in your interview to advise through the investigation stage.

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 types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Category Archives: News

Not long ago, it was generally accepted that if there were no witnesses prepared to attend for a trial, that a defendant would inevitably be acquitted if the case against them even went that far.

These days, the Crown Prosecution Service will often run a case without a willing witness and will base their case upon circumstantial evidence.

The reasons for this change of approach to victimless prosecutions would seem to be twofold. Firstly, the CPS has often been criticised for being weak in pursuing allegations of domestic violence.

Secondly, the police are now routinely equipped with body worn cameras. In many cases, the Police will arrive at the scene and immediately start recording accounts given by witnesses. This may be without the witness having a clue that they are being recorded.

In some cases, the case against a defendant will centre not on what a witness will say in court but on a collection of evidence such as the 999 call recording, the witness’s account to the police on a body worn camera and other evidence such as injuries, or photographs showing a disturbance in a property.

Our Client’s Case

Recently, Nottingham based criminal defence solicitor Jim Buckley  defended a young man who was said to have been involved in a domestic quarrel with his partner whilst on a holiday in Mansfield.

The prosecution chose to proceed with the case even though our client’s partner refused to make a statement and therefore refused to attend at the trial.

Jim successfully defended the case.  Initial arguments that the evidence brought by the CPS was inadmissible under the hearsay rules and that if the evidence were allowed to be given in court it would be so unfair as to prevent the defendant from having a fair trial failed.  Some of the legal considerations to be applied can be found here.

Happily, the defendant gave a good and convincing account of his behaviour, denying the allegation, and he was found not guilty by the District Judge.

This case shows the way that the police and CPS will approach a prosecution is flexible and can change even when the law remains exactly as it was due to other pressures and approaches.

Clients will often say ‘but where is the evidence’ and such comment may be particularly apt in ‘victimless prosecutions’.  There will be evidence however or the case would not be in court.  As a result it is vital to take legal advice at the outset of the case and to make sure that your lawyers are aware of the latest approaches taken by the prosecution and are able to counter them.

Instruct an expert in defending victimless prosecutions

Seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity will allow us to provide advice to you about the law and the evidence in either a police investigation or a prosecution.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any criminal allegation make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.  We will be present in your interview to advise through the investigation stage.

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 types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Category Archives: News

In 1948, when George Orwell wrote his novel, “1984”, he had a vision of the world where Big Brother was watching everybody.

The has perhaps moved closer to the Big Brother state envisaged by Orwell. There are numerous dash cams and doorbell cameras, CCTV cameras, bicycle helmet cameras and everybody has their own pocket camera in their smart phone.  As well as Big Brother, we are now all potentially being recorded by a whole series of little brothers and sisters.

Our client’s case

The position looked bleak for our client.  He had been recorded by his next-door neighbour’s doorbell camera while muttering some

nasty abuse. The neighbour had sent the footage to the police.  Our client was interviewed under caution as a volunteer.

He contacted Public Order Act expert Jim Buckley to advise him at this police interview. Taking free and independent legal advice in police interview is perhaps the most important way a suspect can protect themselves.  Suspects who are unrepresented can cause themselves real difficulties if they answer questions in interview if the evidence does not require comment.

In this case, having considered the evidence disclosed by the police, Jim advised our client was advised to remain silent in his interview.

Charged to Court

Our client was subsequently prosecuted for intentionally causing distress to his neighbour by using abusive or insulting words directed at her camera.

Not guilty verdict

He denied the offence and pleaded not guilty.  At trial it was argued on his behalf that it could not be proved that he knew that the camera was a genuine article and not a dummy.

The prosecution argued that there was a sign next to the doorbell camera saying that it was recording live footage.  However, an alternative argument was that that nobody installing a dummy doorbell camera would put up a sign saying “don’t worry burglars, this is only a dummy camera”!

Our client was found not guilty because the Magistrates could not be sure that our client knew the camera was real or that it had a microphone attached, or that anyone was listening to the device at the time.

Seek our expert criminal defence solicitors

Seeking legal advice at the earliest opportunity will allow us to provide advice to you about the law and the evidence in either a police investigation or a prosecution.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about any criminal allegation including an illegal entry offence make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.  We will be present in your interview to advise through the investigation stage.

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 types of offences.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Category Archives: News

Chesterfield motoring solicitor David Gittins was recently instructed in a case where his client was at real risk of a driving ban, having collected 12 penalty points.

David’s client had received Notices of Intended Prosecutions from a Derbyshire court as a result of speeding offences. If convicted, she would have been over the 12 penalty point limit for keeping her driving licence.  A ban would normally follow. David identified that the client would have a strong argument to keep her licence as losing it would cause her an exceptional level of hardship.

The case began through the Single Justice Procedure (SJP).  David advised the client at an early stage as to her plea and the impact of doing so. He also advised her as to the possibility of arguing exceptional hardship in a bid to allow her to keep driving despite the number of points of her licence.

David had conferences with his client to understand her personal and professional obligations which required a driving licence.  Using his own knowledge of the area he undertook detailed research and set about collating maps, bus times and even calling local taxi firms to get quotes to understand how much taxis would cost his client if she were to lose her licence.

Instructions were also taken from our client’s partner, sister and business partners to obtain further information to put before the court.

Exceptional Hardship

As all drivers know when you reach 12 penalty points the court will disqualify you from driving under the totting up procedure. However, if it can be shown that exceptional hardship will result from a disqualification, a driver may be able to keep their licence even though they have passed the 12 point limit.

Exceptional Hardship is not defined in law and has to be considerably more than the inevitable inconvenience caused by a driving ban.

An argument for Exceptional Hardship could be based on issues that include:

• Loss of a job resulting in loss of accommodation for others such as children;
• An inability to get to any work due to geographical and public transport restrictions;
• Loss of other third persons employment due to businesses having to close;
• The requirement to take family members to urgent medical appointments when no other transport is available.

In this case, David argued exceptional hardship before Magistrates.  Our client gave evidence as to the difficulties she would face if she lost her licence. In addition, the extensive use of digital maps meant that David and his client could show the terrain she would have to cross to walk to a bus stop and the danger that would present to herself and road users given the rural locations.

12 Penalty Points and No Driving Ban

Thankfully David was successful in his representations and exceptional hardship was found. The Magistrates exercised their discretion not to impose a ban. This meant the Client could continue driving and was simply ordered to pay financial penalties for these offences.

David’s advocacy skills and ability to see the bigger picture when collecting evidence before making his argument enabled the client to keep her driving licence.

For this type of case, Legal Aid was not available but a fixed fee was agreed in advance of the work being undertaken and arguably a small price to pay in order to keep your driving licence.

Contact an expert in road traffic law

We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all types of offences.  Follow the link for contact details.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.