VHS Fletchers Solicitors have 5 solicitors’ offices across the Midlands – Nottingham, Derby, Chesterfield, Mansfield and Newark – staffed with specialists in the field of criminal defence work.
Whilst it will come as no surprise that these locations are situated close to local police stations and courts, the team of criminal defence solicitors at VHS Fletchers will happily travel much further to represent clients accused of criminal offences.
To give an example, within the last few months our Chesterfield criminal solicitors and accredited staff office have had many early mornings and late nights travelling the length and breadth of the country to provide our clients expert legal advice.
Places visited by our Chesterfield Criminal Solicitors
Those places recently visited by our Chesterfield lawyers and representatives include:
• York Police Station
• York Magistrates Court
• Lincoln Police Station
• Lincoln Magistrates Court
• Scarborough Police Station
• Huddersfield Police Station
• Leeds Youth Court
• Sheffield Magistrates Court
• Highbury Corner Magistrates Court (London)
• Margate Magistrates Court (Kent)
All of our clients involved in these cases had links to the Chesterfield area and didn’t want anyone other than Chesterfield solicitors who they can trust and build a professional relationship with.
As a result they asked our Chesterfield criminal lawyers to travel and provide expert legal advice in a variety of criminal cases. This included offences such as possession of a bladed article, conspiracy to supply drugs, driving whilst disqualified, breach of a Restraining Order, various Public Order offences and possession of counterfeit currency.
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.
We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all types of offences.
Our offices
Alternatively you can use the contact form below.
Contact
Category Archives: News
Controlling and coercive behaviour legislation
Controlling and coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship is an offence created under Section 76 Serious Crime Act 2015. It has a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment.
As this offence falls under the domestic abuse umbrella, the Code for Crown Prosecutions states “given the seriousness of Domestic Abuse offending, a prosecution will normally be required when the evidential requirements under the Code are met.”
One of our clients was charged with the offence of controlling and coercive behaviour. He denied the allegation. Unfortunately, despite our best efforts before the Magistrates’ Court he was remanded into prison custody pending his trial at the Crown Court.
Chloe visited our client in prison. She obtained detailed instruction from him. These included the whole history of the relationship, his detailed version of events and details of defence witnesses.
From taking instructions it was revealed that our client had been receiving letters in prison from a ‘relative’. It was in fact the complainant who was the author of the letters. The false name had been used in order to bypass the prison checks.
Defence witnesses seen
Chloe contacted the defence witness on behalf of our client. They provided her with screenshots of messages that confirmed the origin of the letters. They were also able to show that the complainant had also transferred money into our client’s prison account. Signed statements were obtained confirming this detail.
We were then in a position to make representations to the Crown Prosecution Service regarding the credibility of the complainant and therefore whether there was a realistic prospect of conviction. The prosecution were persuaded that the prosecution should not proceed.
As a result the case was brought forward into the Court list. The prosecution offered no evidence. The Judge entered a formal not guilty verdict, concluding the case and releasing our client.
This case perhaps clearly sets out the benefits of early case preparation. Rather than wait for trial, we secured our client’s discharge from the proceedings at the earliest opportunity.
Instruct an expert in controlling and coercive behaviour allegations
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.
We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all types of offences.
Our Offices
Alternatively you can use the contact form below.
Contact
Category Archives: News
The law relating to Football Banning Orders changed in 2022. The test for making a Football Banning Order used to be that one should be made when somebody was convicted of football related offences and a court was “satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that making a banning order would help to prevent violence or disorder at, or in connection with, any regulated football matches”.
That has changed so that now a court must make an order unless there are exceptional reasons for not doing so.
Football Banning Orders are very draconian. Many people may think that they are limited to a ban on watching their own team play. However, standard orders last for three years and they ban people from watching any league football matches.
People are banned from travelling to the towns where their team is playing. Those subject to an order will also have to surrender their passports whenever England are playing abroad so be unable to travel themselves.
It is important to bear in mind that a Football Banning Order can be imposed without anything violent having happened. There is a long list of charges where such an order can be sought by the prosecution.
In our latest case, our client was interviewed as to inappropriate chanting at his local football ground. In interview he described his behaviour as indefensible. He was charged with disorderly behaviour. He did not seek the benefit of free and independent legal advice in this interview.
Despite these admissions, one of our experts in defending football related offences, Jim Buckley, defended him and secured an acquittal.
To be guilty of an offence of disorderly conduct it must be proved that the words used were within the hearing of a person likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress.
The only witness was a steward with 23 years’ experience. As a result it could be demonstrated that he was not personally affected by the chanting at all. The Court refused an argument by the prosecution that it could infer that other people there would have been affected in the way necessary to prove the offence.
As a result our client was found not guilty and was able to return to watch his favourite team.
It may be capable to learn lessons from this case study – firstly, be careful what you chant at a football match,. Secondly, never be interviewed without legal advice. Finally, even if you make that mistake with the right lawyer you may still win your case.
Instruct an expert in defending football related offences
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.
If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings for football related offences we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.
We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all types of offences.
Our offices across the East Midlands
Alternatively you can use the contact form below.
Contact
Category Archives: News
Back in the old days, football grounds may have been places where anything went. Those who strove for better words often ended up using four letter words. Now, understandably, people watching football have to be more careful or risk allegations of a football offence.
Things looked bad for a lifelong Wolverhampton Wanderers when he was arrested at the City Ground. Not only were Wolves a goal down but our client found himself in a police cell.
When Morgan Gibbs-White went down and claimed a penalty, our client was accused of shouting “get up” followed by a homophobic slur. Morgan Gibbs-White being a fair distance away. However two policemen claimed to have heard the shout and our client was arrested for disorderly conduct.
VHS Fletchers were able to help having been contacted as Duty Solicitor. Experienced criminal defence solicitor Helen Lees, attended to provide representation at the 2am police interview. Our client was advised and gave a full explanation setting our what he actually shouted.
Not guilty to football offence
He was charged with public order offence of disorderly conduct. The prosecution was seeking a three year Football Banning Order on conviction. This would not only prohibit our client from watching any League Football for three years, but would have caused inconvenience whenever the England Team played abroad. He would have had to surrender his passport in advance of any such game.
Fortunately, one of our football law lawyers, Jim Buckley, was able to secure an acquittal at trial. In cross-examination the arresting officer accepted that in amongst a crowd of 28,000 people at a distance of 12 metres away he could not rule out having misheard the alleged abusive word.
A moral to draw may be not to shout anything that could be misinterpreted as abuse when at a football match. If you make that mistake, don’t compound it by failing to seek free and independent legal advice in police interview.
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.
We have offices across the East Midlands and will happily travel across the country to provide representation for all types of offences.
Our offices across the East Midlands
Alternatively you can use the contact form below.
Contact
Category Archives: News
This month, our Nottingham taxi licence solicitor Denney Lau successfully assisted Mr S in obtaining his taxi licence at a Nottingham council.
Mr S had his taxi licence revoked by the council 2 years ago and his application to another council was refused last year. At both previous committee hearings Mr S was unrepresented – highlighted how a taxi licence solicitor can assist with the chances of success.
Mr S had been a taxi driver for 15 years before having a brief confrontation with a Community Protection Officer for Taxi Enforcement. Although no criminal investigation or criminal conviction resulted from this incident, having viewed the body worn footage, the original committee revoked Mr S’s licence on the basis that his behaviour meant that he was no longer a fit and proper person (Sections 51, 55, and 59 of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976 (Part II).
Mr S then reapplied a year later but failed to disclose the previous revocation, resulting in the Council again deciding he was not a fit and proper person on the basis that he did not act with honesty and integrity throughout the application process.
Mr S sought assistance from our taxi licence solicitor, Denney Lau. Mr S was advised of the law and the documents that were needed to provide to the committee. Denney then produced a defence bundle and represented Mr S at the committee meeting in front of 13 councillors.
In the capacity of a taxi licence solicitor, Denney used his in depth of knowledge in taxi licence law and made strong and persuasive representations which resulted in the council granting the application.
Mr S was delighted with the result and that his livelihood can now resume once more.
Whilst taxi licencing matters are not covered under the Legal Aid Scheme our competitive rates allow us to provide a comprehensive service on your behalf.
We have offices across the East Midlands and provide nationwide advice and representation. Find your nearest office here, or use the contact form to get in contact with one of our taxi licence solicitors.
Category Archives: News
As a firm we have had to react to changing circumstances over the last last few years. This has resulted in us investing time and resources in an increased number of trainee solicitors.
Legal aid in crisis?
Once again the Government has ignored advice as to the financial difficulties legal aid firms face. This advice included the necessity for an immediate and significant rise in fees to permit the sector to remain viable.
Instead, the Secretary of State, Dominic Raab, has imposed a real terms cut in fees against a background of fee levels that have been, at best, frozen since the 1990s.
The furlough scheme allowed criminal lawyers the time to re-evaluate there position, with many across the sector choosing academia, family law, the independent Bar or civil practice.
Perhaps the biggest threat to staff recruitment and retention has come from the Crown Prosecution Service who launched an aggressive recruitment campaign in January 2020. Firms across the country have seen an exodus of staff to the prosecution that offers salaries that may not be matched in private practice and, on the face of it, a better work life balance.
Investment in trainee solicitors
In response to this combination of factors we have chosen to increase our investment in trainee solicitors specialising in criminal defence. We know that the work will always be interesting and hope that those who apply will remain committed to what can be a difficult and challenging job but ultimately a rewarding one.
As a result we currently employ six trainees across our offices.
We ensure that they obtain their police accreditation so that they are able to provide advice and representation to those being interviewed by the police, under the supervision of solicitor and Higher Court Advocate Shannon English. This ensures a consistency of approach to their training and allows them the pleasure of taking part in our out of hours’ rota. Advice is provided to those in police custody 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
Thereafter they learn the skills they need through hands on experience preparing cases that are due before the Magistrates’ Court, Crown Court and the Court of Appeal.
Our trainee solicitors will undertake the courses required for qualification, but will choose the options that are bested suited to a career in criminal defence including courses preparing them for securing their Higher Rights of Audience.
At the end of training period there is invariably posts available across our offices as an assistant solicitor, representing clients at the police station and before the Magistrates’ Court with the opportunity for career development to become a Solicitor Advocate representing those facing allegations before the Crown Court.
Meet our trainee solicitors
Nottingham trainee solicitor Kinga Nowak
Kinga Nowak joined VHS Fletchers in June 2021, having initially completed a law degree in her native Poland before moving to the UK. She took an access course in criminal law before completing her Law Degree at the University of Lincoln. Following that Kinga completed her Legal Practice Course and Masters in Law at Nottingham Trent University.
Kinga will qualify in June 2023.
Chesterfield trainee solicitor Declan Smith
Declan Smith joined VHS Fletchers in July 2021, initially as a Paralegal at our Chesterfield Office before commencing his training contract.
He graduated from the University of Derby in 2020 with an undergraduate degree in law, before continuing his studies completing the Legal Practice Course in the spring of 2021 with the aim of qualifying as a solicitor.
Declan is to qualify as a solicitor in August 2023.
Nottingham trainee solicitor Danielle Lunn
Danielle Lunn joined VHS Fletchers in July 2022 as a Trainee Solicitor at our Nottingham office.
Her undergraduate legal studies were completed at Manchester Metropolitan University in 2020, graduating with a first-class honours Law degree. She then went on to complete the Legal Practice Course and Master’s in Law at Nottingham Trent University achieving a distinction.
Danielle will complete her training in January 2024.
Chesterfield trainee solicitor Chloe Wright
Chloe Wright joined VHS Fletchers in January 2022 as a Trainee Solicitor at our Chesterfield office.
Having graduated from Sheffield Hallam University in the summer of 2020 with an undergraduate degree in Law., Chloe then continued her studies at Leeds Beckett University, completing the Legal Practice Course in the spring of 2021 before completing a masters degree the following summer.
Chloe will qualify in January 2024.
Derby trainee solicitor Patrick
Patrick Fisher, known to many as Paddy, joined VHS Fletchers in July 2022 as a Trainee Solicitor in our Derby office.
He completed his undergraduate degree in Law at Nottingham Trent University, graduating in 2021 with a 2:1 classification.
Following this, he went on to study for his Legal Practice Course and Master’s continuing with his studies at Nottingham Law School.
Paddy is due to qualify in July 2024.
Nottingham trainee solicitor Kirsty Gregson
Kirsty Gregson joined VHS Fletchers in January 2023 as a Trainee Solicitor at our Nottingham office.
Kirsty completed her law studies at the University of Leicester in 2021, graduating with first-class honours. Kirsty then completed her Legal Practice Course and Masters in Nottingham at the University of Law.
Kirsty will qualify as a solicitor in July 2024.
Future Plans
We will shortly be recruiting for at least one trainee post based at our Nottingham office and due to start in July 2023. We will advertise the post as usual on Crimeline, and our LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter and Instagram pages.
Please keep an eye on those if you are likely to be interested.
Category Archives: News
The use of intermediaries during criminal trials is becoming increasingly commonplace. An intermediary may be used to assist any witness, including a defendant, give evidence.
The functions of an intermediary
“Intermediaries are communication specialists (not supporters or expert witnesses) whose role is to facilitate communication between the witness and the court, including the advocates. Intermediaries are independent of the parties and owe their duty to the court.”
Directing the Jury
At the trial, before the witness or defendant gives evidence, the judge should explain to the jury the following:
The need for an intermediary: e.g. by identifying the problems arising from the age or other difficulties of the defendant or witness.
The purpose of an intermediary: which is to assist in communication, among other things by helping advocates to ask questions in a way the defendant or witness can understand and/or assisting the defendant or witness to communicate his/her answers to the jury.
The intermediary is independent of the parties, is present only to assist communication and is not a witness and so is not permitted to give evidence.
The use of the intermediary must not affect the jury’s assessment of the evidence of the defendant or witness and is no reflection on the defendant or witness.
If the defendant elects to give evidence, it may be appropriate at this point to give more detail of any difficulties the defendant has, if those difficulties may affect the perception of the jury of the defendant’s evidence.
Assisting a Defendant
The current provisions concerning intermediaries are very much stacked in favour of assistance for prosecution witnesses, but case law makes it very clear that defendants are entitled to equal treatment.
Recent case law (e.g. Dean Thomas [2020] EWCA Crim 117) has placed further hurdles in the way of defendants seeking assistance, but we will always ensure that the legal rights of those we represent are fully protected. Appropriate applications for an intermediary will be made where necessary.
Giving evidence is daunting for most people, but particularly so for defendants facing the considerable pressure of being accused of an offence that they deny.
You can be assured that we will always act to enable you to present the best evidence possible.
Advocates and litigators experienced in dealing with intermediaries and vulnerable witnesses
This involved learning the particular skill of planning questioning suitable to the characteristics of a witness or defendant, taking into account intermediary reports and suggestions. It is potentially a difficult task to elicit correct facts from vulnerable witnesses where the ability to question is limited.
Our advocates will regularly use the Advocates’ Gateway Toolkit that provides assistance in identifying when a witness or defendant may be vulnerable, as well as helping in the formulation of questions for those who may have, for example, autism or a learning difficulty, or be vulnerable due to their youth.
Our litigators are experienced in identifying clients or their witnesses who may be vulnerable and benefit from the assistance of an intermediary.
Ask for our specialist advice
We provide nationwide advice and representation in criminal matters from our offices across the East Midlands. You can find your nearest office here 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
It’s funny how things change as the years pass by. Perhaps only ten years ago, if we were thinking about particular spikes in alleged criminal offending over the Christmas period, the one that would jump out would always be drunk driving.
These days it is common to come across drug driving due to advances in technology and the ability to detect an increasing range of substances in the body.
It is well documented that if people believe the chances of detection to be low, the temptation to commit a crime is higher. Most people know that there is considerable pressure on police resources. Therefore even when we see a police car on the roads, it is most likely already being deployed to an active incident, not cruising the streets looking for errant drivers.
Ironically, the story here tends to be related to the morning after.
The main event is often an otherwise minor road traffic accident attracting the attention of a passing police officer, resulting in alcohol and drug testing and an arrest for those still affected by the excesses of the night before.
Drugs can be particularly problematic as their journey through the body is much less predictable than alcohol, putting those users at risk for extended periods.
Road traffic law remains one of the most complex areas of criminal law, so if you are being investigated for any drug or alcohol-related driving incident or have been charged or summonsed to appear before a court, it is very much in your interests to contact us at the first opportunity. These offences will invariably result in a driving disqualification if you are convicted. The stakes can be enormous, particularly if you rely on a driving licence as part of your employment.
We will explore all available offences and mitigation and ensure you receive the finest representation.
Drug Driving – Sentencing Guidance
As a guide, where an offence of driving or attempting to drive has been committed and there are no factors that increase seriousness the Court should consider a starting point of a Band C fine, and a disqualification in the region of 12–22 months.
Where there are factors that increase seriousness, the Court should consider increasing the sentence on the basis of the level of seriousness.
The community order threshold is likely to be crossed where there is evidence of one or more factors that increase seriousness. The Court should also consider imposing a disqualification in the region of 23–28 months.
The custody threshold is likely to be crossed where there is evidence of one or more factors that increase seriousness and one or more aggravating factors. The Court should also consider imposing a disqualification in the region of 29–36 months.
Drink Driving – Sentencing Guidance
The starting point applies to all offenders irrespective of plea or previous convictions.
Drink and drug driving defence solicitors
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.
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.
Contact
Category Archives: News
Solicitor Nick Wright recently attended a Derbyshire Court User Group meeting where changes to remand courts in Derbyshire were presented as a fait accompli.
Lack of legal advisers
HMCTS has lost legal advisers locally. As a result there are insufficient legal advisers to run occasional courts for Saturdays and bank holidays in both Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire. As a result from 9 October all remand cases heard on those days will now be dealt with at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court.
The intention is that there be two courts sitting, one for Nottinghamshire cases and one for Derby cases. HMCTS is still considering whether a third court can be held on bank holidays.
Enquiries were made as to whether other local legal advisers were in a position to step in. Unfortunately the answer is ‘no’. The contracts for legal advisers have recently been changed and the raise in basic salary funded by a cut in overtime rates. Unsurprisingly, there is a lack of volunteers. No doubt morale will be as low in the Court Service as elsewhere in the justice system.
Although we were told that the courts are committed to filling the staffing gap, and there are currently six trainees in the region, it has been noted that there are no legal adviser position advertised locally on the relevant website.
Problems for Derbyshire defendants
The new arrangements simply ignore the geography involved in order to suit the needs of the court caused by a failure to recruit.
The most northerly firm clients to fall within the Derbyshire ‘catchment’ may be as far away as Glossop. Glossop to Nottingham is a round trip of 140 miles, over three hours by car.
How will those granted bail or sentenced on a Saturday return home, leaving Nottingham late on a Saturday afternoon? Who will fund the journey home when many defendants are dependent upon benefits?
It also ignores the reality that family assistance and input is often crucial to permit bail applications to be made. Addresses and background information are provided by family and friends attending court in person to speak to the solicitor. Again, these arrangements are likely to render this support far more difficult or impossible, to the detriment of our clients.
Problems for lawyers
Another reality is that the effect of the change is that Derbyshire lawyers will not be able to represent their clients in a cost effective manner. As a result, the likelihood is that their clients will lose continuity of representation and the benefits that go with that.
Aside from the time involved in travel and the uncertainties relating to the granting of legal aid for those detained, Even if legal aid were granted the Legal Aid Agency has reminded practitioners that Nottingham is a ‘designated’ court. As a result, no time can be claimed by lawyers travelling to the court. The journey from Glossop or Chesterfield or Buxton or Derby will not attract any payment.
In terms of the organisation of work within these firms, managers will be faced with an uphill struggle to persuade advocates to attend Nottingham on Saturday mornings for what will inevitably be longer days.
Hunt the client
Unhelpfully, Derbyshire defendants could be found in any number of places on a Saturday morning. A maximum of 10 clients will be taken from Derbyshire to the Nottingham cells on a Saturday. The expectation is that rather than be told where a client is, solicitors need to phone the Nottingham cells on a Saturday morning. If the client isn’t in the cells then it would seem likely they are still at a police station.
Defendants over the magic number of 10 are to be dealt with by CVP from either St Mary’s Wharf police station in Derby or Ripley police station.
CVP can be requested in advance, adding another layer of bureaucracy to Saturday morning courts. Practitioners are unlikely to know whether the application is granted until the Saturday morning. Blanket approval cannot be given.
There are limited phone lines that can be used to speak with those kept at the police station and it is hard to see how, 16 months into the pandemic, it is still though appropriate to make a decision on bail and therefore liberty with instructions taken over the phone.
And what of probation?
Unsurprisingly, Derbyshire probation officers will not be expected to serve the Saturday courts in Nottingham, further prejudicing clients.
Defence subsiding the justice system again
It can be seen that once again the defendants and the defence lawyers are meant to absorb the costs of a collapsing justice system. Where are local courts left were the six trainees not to remain but seek better working conditions in another sector post qualification? What if more qualified advisers leave?
There appears to be no credible plan, and the number of courts are simply reduced and reduced at the expense of clients, their families, their representatives and local justice.
This may present an opportunity for practitioners to say ‘no more’ and refuse to provide representation in these courts. It is easy to see how court service failures could be used to justify the closures of courts such as Mansfield and Chesterfield which could easily go the way of Newark or Ilkeston Magistrates’.
Only time will tell!
Category Archives: News
Duty qualified legal executive Nikki Carlisle
Duty qualified Legal Executive Nikki Carlisle was one of the staff who wasn’t furloughed when the Pandemic struck and it was apparent that volumes of work undertaken by the courts was to substantially reduce.
At the time Nikki kept a diary of the first week working under lockdown and it is perhaps a useful reminder of the pressure that she, and other staff, were placed under by the police and the courts, including new processes and technology.
The fact that our staff were able to continue to provide a quality service to clients in extremely difficult and potentially dangerous situations is a testament to their skills and professionalism. It might be fair to say that those involved in criminal defence were largely forgotten as other decisions were made.
Throughout we had an eye on the welfare of our clients and were able to deal with many voluntary police ‘interviews’ without the need for a formal recorded interview with police.
Nikki’s Diary
It would be an understatement to say that the Coronavirus pandemic is causing chaos in the world right now. We see it on the news constantly. We’re reminded of it every time we face the battle that is now the weekly food shop. It means that we’re unable to go to work as normal, or to visit our nearest and dearest.
Something that most people probably haven’t given a second thought to, is the impact that it is having on our criminal justice system.
I am one of the few people left behind at my place of work, as a result of the decision to furlough employees. This is a decision that most criminal defence firms have had to take, due to the fact that the courts are not running as normal. Employers have had to make this difficult decision to avoid redundancies.
I thought it might be an interesting insight for those who are not part of the criminal justice system, to see how we’re coping with these changes on a day-to-day basis.
Wednesday 1st April 2020
This is the first day of work “post-furlough”. There are only a handful of staff remaining, consisting of trainee solicitors, myself (a legal executive), solicitors, higher court advocates, and support staff. We each have our different roles to play in this strange new way of working, and on this particular day we have no idea what to expect.
My role consists of undertaking work at the police stations and at the Magistrates Court. The current position is that anyone who was charged with an offence and bailed to attend court, or who received a summons to attend court, will not have to come until a later date. The police are also supposed to be limiting the number of interviews they conduct face-to-face with suspects. The purpose of this is to prevent the spread of the Coronavirus. Courts and police stations are busy buildings, with a lot of people passing through every single day. In particular, we are also supposed to be complying with new “social distancing” rules which mean that we should be staying at least 2 metres away from people at all times.
The first job of the day is to deal with a youth who has been arrested and taken to a local police station, for an allegation of armed robbery. I received written disclosure from the officers in the case and then spoke with the client in a booth which contained a glass partition between us, so that I could take his instructions. The client had an alibi that he wished to raise for the offence. There was also a significant amount of work that the police still had to undertake. I made representations to the officers that it was not right at this moment in time to interview a suspect in a small room which would contain five people (the client, myself, an appropriate adult, and two police officers) so that we would not be able to maintain social distancing. The police needed to go and check out this client’s alibi and undertake further enquiries. I said that we would refuse to be interviewed at this time.
The officers refused to delay the matter and insisted on a face-to-face interview. They said that if my client refused to have an interview in a formal interview room, they would interview him in his cell. This was a young client who was vulnerable by virtue of his age. I decided it would be unfair to put the client in this situation and agreed therefore to a formal interview, but with only one officer into the interview room. No PPE (Personal Protective Equipment e.g. masks or gloves) was provided to me, the client, or his uncle who had attended as his appropriate adult. After the interview, during which we all sat as far apart as we could, and the client’s uncle kindly handed out antibacterial hand wipes, the client was released without charge, as there was insufficient evidence against him.
The frustrating thing about dealing with this case was the attitude of the police, and their complete disregard for the current situation and the safety of the people in the interview room.
Later that day I dealt with another case and had a completely different experience with officers from the same force. This case involved an incident where the client had been arrested for serious assaults. The officers told me that, if the client did not wish to be interviewed due to concerns about social distancing, they were happy to deal with the matter by way of a written statement from him. In this case however the client was very adamant that he wanted to give a full account in interview, which he was entitled to do. Again, we sat in an interview room as far apart as possible to comply with social distancing as best we could. During the interview, in his eagerness to demonstrate something to the officers, the client grabbed hold of my hand and came very close to my face. This was quite a distressing situation to be in. We are all aware that people can carry the Coronavirus without symptoms, and this is why social distancing measures are in place. It is scary to think that I could be exposed to the virus in the course of my employment and take it back home to my loved ones. Whilst the police continue to conduct face-to-face interviews, this is a situation that myself, and many others in the same job as me, will be faced with every day.
Thursday 2nd April 2020
After a day spent at the police station dealing with clients yesterday, today I found myself faced with a full day at court.
I attended my local court in the morning to deal with my remand cases, only to be faced with a very unusual scene. It transpires that today is the first day the court will be conducting hearings by way of Skype!
In normal circumstances, when I attend the remand court, I will obtain the paperwork by email in the morning, speak to the prosecutor about the case, and then walk across to the court cells to see the client. After consultation with the client I walk back across to the court building, and the hearing is conducted with all parties present in the room, and the client in the dock. Detainees from both Mansfield and Bridewell Police Station will be brought to the Nottingham Magistrates Court cells to be dealt with.
I am told today that the security staff who normally run the court cells are no longer working due to the Coronavirus. This means that the people who have been charged and kept for Court in Mansfield are still in Mansfield Police Station, and the people from the Bridewell are still in the Bridewell.
The difficulty with consultations arises when we are told that the Bridewell have one phone on which solicitors can speak to their clients, in the cells, to ensure the consultation is private.
There are approximately 7 solicitors at court, with 15 or so clients to deal with between us. This means that each of us will have to wait to speak to our clients, for however long it takes for the previous solicitor to finish speaking to their clients. This will hold the court up and cause massive delays in dealing with the workload.
Eventually we are told by the Bridewell that we are able to attend the police station to speak to our clients in their secure consultation booths to speed up the process. Whilst this is not ideal, as we are supposed to be avoiding going into police stations where at all possible, we feel obliged to do this in order to prevent delays in the court room and to prevent delays in our clients being released from custody.
I have two clients to see, and I see them both in the consultation booths. The first is the client that I had represented the previous day for serious assaults. The second is a client who was unrepresented in interview and has now been charged with serious drugs offences. After speaking to them both, I head back over to the court building to deal with their cases.
This is the first time I have ever used Skype, and after creating an account I sit at the back of court to observe other solicitors and see if there are any issues I need to be aware of before my own cases are called on.
The District Judge has a laptop with Skype on, as does the legal advisor, the prosecutor, and the defence solicitor. The defendant is being linked in via Skype on a laptop from the police station. There are some significant technical issues, which cause awful screeching feedback on numerous occasions, seemingly due to the number of users being present in one room. When my cases are called on, I move to another room within the court building and link into the hearing session. This seems to do the trick. One hearing goes without a problem, and the other is put over to the afternoon session due to lack of court time.
By the time I return in the afternoon another client has been arrested on a warrant, so I repeat the process again with him and conduct my final two hearings via Skype, again from a different room in the court building, with no issues at all.
As I leave court, I receive an email from a colleague, containing the new Interview Protocol which has been prepared by various parties to the criminal justice system (the CPS, the NPCC, and the Law Society to name a few). This is a protocol that MUST be followed by us all. It is an exciting read. It means that very few interviews will be conducted in person, meaning that we will be less at risk on a day-to-day basis.
Friday 3rd April 2020
Today was a frustrating one. After having received the new protocol the previous evening, which said that where possible interviews will be conducted remotely (officer emails us disclosure about the offence, we conduct a private conference with the client via telephone, and then use software such as Skype to be present in the interview) I received a call very early in the day to say one of my clients was at a local police station, having been arrested for a shop theft and an assault. I asked for disclosure to be emailed so that I could have my private consultation with the client. It transpired that this police station has no facilities to allow a private consultation with the client remotely.
So, despite having been told at 4.30pm yesterday that I would only have to attend the police station for the most serious offences, I find myself in a police station for two very low-level offences. Which it turns out, have both been caught on CCTV.
I spoke to my client and told him that I had seen the CCTV. He was happy for me to put forward a statement on his behalf saying that he would refuse to be interviewed about the offence, that there was sufficient evidence to charge him, and there was no point in putting us all at risk in an interview.
Frustratingly, I had to argue about this. Neither the officer dealing with the case, nor the custody sergeant, were even aware of the new protocol. Having anticipated this (call it a hunch), I had printed off two hard copies of the protocol to hand over to them. Having read the protocol, they still tried to insist on an interview. I explained that the protocol was quite clear, and under no circumstances would my client be interviewed.
My client was charged with the offence and was to be put before the court via Skype that afternoon.
As I was leaving, I was told that another client required my representation. This was another client who had committed offences which were caught on CCTV. This time the sergeant knew what I was going to say before I even said it, and this client was also charged to be put before the court that afternoon, without an unnecessary interview.
I left the station wondering why the police were still so insistent on interviews. At a time when we are all at risk of catching the Coronavirus, when we are encouraged to avoid interaction with other people where at all possible, some police officers seem to have forgotten that they are not immune to this virus, and that any of us could be carrying it without symptoms. It is not only in my interests and my clients interests to avoid unnecessary interviews, but also in the interests of officers as well.
I travelled to the office (where I am still able to work as I am the only person in the office) from the police station, in order to connect to the court via Skype to represent the two clients. The hearings again went without a hitch.
I have now conducted five hearings via Skype and although I would much rather conduct hearings in person, it is becoming less daunting. I am still very keen for things to get back to normal.
Saturday 4th April 2020
It was my turn to cover the weekend court session this week. I attend to cover court duty, meaning that I represent, free of charge, whoever requires representation but doesn’t have their own solicitor. I also have another client to deal with who has been arrested on a warrant.
This session is significantly more stressful than the previous two Skype court sessions I have dealt with. Firstly, the legal advisors covering court this weekend have not had to conduct hearings via Skype yet, and so they are learning the ropes themselves. Secondly, I have two cases, and they are in different court rooms.
After seeing my first client in consultation, I am about to see my second client when a custody sergeant tells me that the court have just called on my first client. At that exact moment I am in a different building, with four sets of secure doors to get out of before I can get over to court to conduct the hearing. I have no way of contacting the court to tell them I am about to see another client, because it is a Saturday so there is no one manning the court phones. I have no choice but to make a run for it. It takes me some time to get out of the Bridewell, through three sets of locked doors, before I then sprint across (in my suit and heels, no less) to the court building to join the court hearing session. After that hearing is over, I then have to head back over to the Bridewell to see the second client.
Technical issues mean that my second hearing has to be conducted using the camera on my laptop to Skype into the hearing but using the microphone on the legal advisor’s laptop so that the client can hear me.
I am very happy when I am able to leave the building after this stressful court session.
Monday 6th April 2020
Today was spent in the office catching up on my paperwork for the last few days. It has been a lot busier than expected at work since the furlough and I have to fill out reports for each police station attendance and court hearing, apply for Legal Aid to cover the costs of the client’s representation, and also write to all of the clients with the outcomes of their cases. Between catching up on paperwork, responding to emails, and dealing with client queries, the day actually goes alarmingly fast but much less stressful than last week!
Tuesday 7th April 2020
Today I had the unenviable task of undertaking diary management. As previously mentioned, the court has decided to not deal with “bail” cases for the foreseeable future. This means that I have to go through the court diary, identify all of the cases which will be adjourned, contact the court to find out the new hearing date, insert that date into the diary, and then write to the client providing them with the new date. It’s one of the less interesting aspects of the job but very important to make sure that we know when the clients are in court, and most importantly that the clients know when they’re in court!
And on the plus side, I haven’t had to go into any germ ridden police stations.
Wednesday 8th April 2020
I had a very successful day today, in terms of my ongoing battles with the police in enforcing the new protocols.
The fun began at 08.00 when the police contacted me to say they were ready to interview a client about an offence of shop theft. As per the new protocol I insisted that the disclosure be emailed to me. Once again, the officer didn’t seem to know what I was talking about but was happy to oblige anyway. The disclosure was that the client had been caught stealing items from a shop. He had been stopped by security in possession of the goods and the police arrived a short time later. I rang the custody sergeant and asked to speak to my client on the mobile phone in his cell. I was told that the phone was exclusively for use for the purposes of court hearings, and that I would need to come to the police station to see the client. Furthermore, I was told that he was displaying symptoms of the Coronavirus and I would have to speak to him through the hatch at his cell door!
Bearing in mind the time of day, I insisted that I be allowed to speak to the client on the mobile. Court did not start for another two hours, and under no circumstances would I be coming to speak to a client through the cell door. After some arguing the custody sergeant eventually relented. I spoke to the client who was happy for me to refuse interview on his behalf, on the basis that there was enough evidence to charge him already. He was charged and bailed for the offence.
Throughout the course of the day I successfully dealt with three other police station cases remotely. Disclosure was emailed to me by the officer, I spoke with the client over the phone, and then I emailed statements to the officers based on instructions that the client had received.
Whilst this might seem like a relatively easy way of dealing with cases, it is actually very time consuming and I am finding that the cases are taking just as long to deal with, as if I was actually attending the police station in person. The bonus of course being, that neither myself nor the clients are being put at risk of infection unnecessarily.
There is a WhatsApp group which contains the people who are still working. It’s a good way to find out what everyone is able to cover in terms of police stations and court cases, and also to report back to each other about how things are going in terms of the protocol. I am pleased that I’ve been able to report a fully successful day to my colleagues, with all matters dealt with remotely. There is still a lack of understanding from a lot of officers and custody sergeants about what is expected of them but I’m confident that if we keep battling on, we’ll be able to keep ourselves safe.
Thursday 9th April 2020
The early morning was a relatively quiet one, again spent catching up on paperwork from the previous day.
Mid-morning, I received a call to say that a case was ready to deal with at the police station. I spoke to the officer on the phone and he gave me verbal disclosure about the incident. I asked to speak to the client on the phone and was told again that the mobile phone was in use for the purpose of court. This time, due to the time of day, I accepted that. The officer said that there was no other way for me to have a private consultation with the client, other than to attend in person. In accordance with the new protocol I made representations to the officer that they were in breach of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act by not being able to provide facilities for confidential legal advice, and given that this case was not a serious one warranting immediate attendance, they should release the client immediately on bail to be interviewed at a later date. The officer agreed with my representations and the client was bailed a short time later.
I then received a call from a client who said that he and his brother were wanted by the police. An officer had contacted them to ask them to attend for a voluntary interview at the police station, and they wanted me to represent them. I discussed the protocol with the client, who was happy to deal with the case remotely if possible. I ran this by the officer who said that he would like to email me disclosure about the offence and a list of questions to put to the clients, and he would like the answers to be emailed back to him. This is a way in which slightly more complex matters can be dealt with under the new protocol. This means that the police can ensure that all of the questions they want to put to clients are dealt with, and still prevents the need for us to put ourselves at risk by attending the police station in person.
In the afternoon I attended court to deal with an application by the prosecution to adjourn a trial, and also a bad character application. These were both cases I was looking after on behalf of my colleagues who have been furloughed.
The District Judge at Court has been sitting every day, including Saturday, and has made positive comments in recognition of the hard work we are all putting in to keep the system going despite the difficult situation.
It’s little things like this which make it all a bit easier. Today’s advice; “keep trucking!”
Friday 10th April 2020
Today was Good Friday! I had most of the day off but was on call in the evening, covering Mansfield and Chesterfield area. This runs from 6pm tonight until 6pm tomorrow. I also held the out of hours office phone for the evening. Luckily, I didn’t have to deal with any police station cases myself. My colleague who was also on call however, covering Nottingham and Derby, was not so lucky. He attempted to deal with a case at the Bridewell Police Station by telephone but was told that there was no facility for the client to have a private consultation with him other than in person. He attended the police station for instructions, and luckily was able to deal with the matter by way of a written statement. The client was then released without charge due to insufficient evidence.
It is a shame that the facilities are not consistently in place for clients to have confidential advice on the phone. This is yet another example of someone going into a police station, putting himself and his family at risk, when the matter could quite easily have been dealt with in another way.
There doesn’t appear to be any consistency at all, and it’s incredibly frustrating.
Saturday 11th April 2020
Today I was still on call until 6pm and had a jam-packed day.
I managed to successfully deal with four police station cases by telephone, two at Mansfield and two at Chesterfield. Both police stations have the facilities now to enable clients to speak to you in their cell on a portable phone. In all cases the officers emailed me disclosure about the offence(s), I spoke to the clients on the phone, and then emailed over written statements.
The final case however, required an attendance in person. This was a voluntary interview for a historic offence. The police were keen to have the matter dealt with soon, however accepted that due to the age of the offence it wasn’t urgent that it be dealt with today, and if the client was happy for the matter to be postponed then they would postpone it. I spoke to the client over the phone. He was incredibly anxious, and already travelling to the police station. The stress of having the allegation hanging over him was causing him so many difficulties that he really did want to be interviewed and have it over and done with today. I therefore attended the police station to represent him. I was given written disclosure by the officer and was pleased that not only did the officer provide me with a face mask and gloves, but she, her colleague, and the client, also wore a mask and gloves. We each sat with our chairs as far apart as possible. In the circumstances, although not ideal, it was the safest way the interview could have been conduct and I was pleased with the attitude that the officers displayed in this case. The client was pleased to have the matter resolved that day.
I can only hope that other officers will all have the same attitude as this particular officer moving forward.
How we can help
We hope that the above demonstrates how hard we worked on behalf of our clients in extremely difficult circumstances. We exercised judgement as to the safest way for our clients to be dealt with within the justice system, often battling with police intransigence, particularly in the early stages of the virus.
Whilst it will come as no surprise that these locations are situated close to local police stations and courts, the team of criminal defence solicitors at VHS Fletchers will happily travel much further to represent clients accused of criminal offences.
