Our Crown Court representation secures not guilty verdict
The offending was said to have occurred over a period of two days and the alleged victim was known to Caine’s client. Originally there were two allegations made by the same complainant. He was in his forties and of previous good character.
Free and independent police station advice
Caine’s client took the opportunity to have free and independent legal advice in the police station. He answered all questions put to him. He maintained that they were in a relationship and any contact was consensual.
Further, he went on the state that there would be material on both his and her phone that would support his account. In particular, there would be messaging between her and her friends that would corroborate what he said.
Our client was released on police bail. He was told that this was to permit the interrogation of the mobile phones in the case. He remained on police bail for seven months.
Following investigation, the police and prosecution made a bizarre decision not to charge the most serious offence, but simply proceed with one of the allegations. Bearing in mind both allegations hinged on the credibility of the same complainant this was hard to understand.
Prosecution pressured to review the case
When the case was first before the court statements were served. It became clear why the prosecution were not proceeding with one of the charges as the complainant had changed her account in a significant way. It remained hard to see why the prosecution were continuing with the second allegation in the circumstances.
Of greater concern was that requests for the phone evidence that the police had had seven months to secure went unheeded. Caine drafted a defence statement. This demonstrated the importance of the phone evidence. He repeated the request when the defence statement was served.
Again, the prosecution delayed in providing the information. Eventually, it was confirmed that the complainant had refused to hand over her mobile phone to the police so downloads could not be obtained.
The matter was listed for two pre-trial reviews so that pressure could be placed on the prosecution to review the case. On both occasions, different Judges raised concerns about the wisdom of proceeding with the case. In having the case listed we were able to keep up pressure on the prosecution to drop the prosecution.
Missing phone evidence
The prosecution finally confirmed that not only had the complainant’s phone not been handed to the police but that she had disposed of it and now had a new one. As a result, all of the evidence had been lost. The complainant maintained that she had never been asked for her phone. This was at odds with unused material that Caine had seen.
In the end the prosecution were compelled to review the case one further time and decided to offer no evidence in the week before the trial. A not guilty verdict was entered. This was clearly the right decision and removed any risk that our client would be convicted before a jury.
All of this was achieved with our client having the benefit of Crown Court criminal legal aid.
Instruct experts in Crown Court representation
We have an experienced team of crown court litigators and in-house advocates to provide you with expert crown court representation. An important part of the preparation of your case will be to see whether the prosecution can be put in a position where it has to drop your case before trial.
If you wish to instruct Caine in a case then please telephone him on 0115 9599550 or use the contact form below.