When the Director of Public Prosecutions Alison Saunders feels the need to write to a national newspaper to apologise for a prosecution failure in an individual case, something significant must have gone wrong. The failure related to Crown Court disclosure of evidential material.
Of course, it might be thought a great pity that she chose to write to the newspaper first, rather than the person wrongly accused of rape.
So, what were the things that the prosecution and police got wrong in the case of Liam Allan?
Mr Allan was charged with multiple accusations of rape and sexual assault. This is the type of case that juries throughout the country grapple with on a daily basis. It would no doubt be a challenge for jury members in any circumstances.
Jury trial for serious sexual offences
First the jury would hear the complainant in alleging that she was a victim of serious sexual crime. The jury would then hear the position of the young man in question who had always stated that that it was all consensual.
As most sexual encounters happen in private, as lawyers we will often face cases where the case involves the word of one person against another. Can there be smoke without fire? Why would the allegation be made in the first place if untrue?
But what if the key to ‘solving’ the issue of whose account was correct was sitting in phone records that had already been obtained. All that was required was that people simply do their job. That was the situation in the case of Liam Allan.
After the alleged crime, the complainant sent a series of text messages to Mr Allan asking for more sex. The messages disclosed, in fact, that she wanted violent sex. She spoke about wanting to be raped. Even worse here, in a further round of texts, she made clear to a friend that no crime had been committed by Mr Allan.
This is the type of evidence which should hole a case below the water line, leading to the end of a prosecution. In this case it did, but only after two years. Mr Allan understandably described this period as a ‘living hell’.
Failure to disclose text messages
The sadness, in this case, is that it could have been avoided. This is because Mr Allan raised the issue of text messages in his police interview. His account was ignored. Instead, the officer in the case went on to also ignore clear guidelines on Crown Court disclosure. Although the police had the text messages he did not bring them to the attention of the prosecuting barrister.
It was only a very late intervention, three days into the trial, that uncovered what the police had known all along, that Mr Allan was innocent. So, in the end, all’s well that ends well. Commentators might argue that the system works. For Mr Allan, it will be a long time indeed before the scars of that period heal.
While we would wish to provide you with the assurance that Mr Allan’s case is a ‘one-off’, we cannot. The issue of disclosure has been a fundamental problem in the area of criminal justice for decades. This point has been illustrated by dozens of high profile miscarriages of justice.
It would appear likely that these cases must only be the tip of the iceberg. Every single day the liberty of people standing trial is put at risk due to failures within the disclosure process.
Ensure you receive proper Crown Court disclosure of evidence
Because we are acutely aware of these problems and the risks to your case of a failure of Crown Court disclosure, all of our staff work relentlessly to ensure that all relevant evidence is revealed by the police and the prosecution.
From first police disclosure, right through to trial applications, we do not rest until satisfied that cases of our clients are prepared to the very highest of standards.
Instruct an expert crown court litigator
We provide nationwide advice and representation from our six offices across the East Midlands. Please contact your most convenient office to make an appointment to discuss your case.
A lot is said in the country about the benefits of a jury trial as opposed to trial before the Magistrates’ Court. It is argued that leaving a decision as to guilt or innocence in the hands of twelve people chosen at random is the fairest way to securing justice. How does a jury decide your fate?
There is a lot that we do not know about a jury trial
The process of how a jury reaches its decision is generally unknown however. Laws prevent us from examining real jury decisions and questioning jurors on their findings.
Although there have been lots of academic studies, in reality these shed very little light on the process of the decision making.
We do know the legal process that guides them in their decision making. Despite the lack of ‘hard proof’ as to the effectiveness of a jury trial, most lawyers actively support trial by jury.
The internet age
The power of Google and social network services such as Facebook or Twitter can present challenges. Recent publicity has highlighted cases in which jurors have sought information about a case or a defendant from these sources.
There is a good reason why certain information is withheld from a jury. This might include, for example, previous convictions of a defendant. Going behind explicit instructions not to discuss evidence with anyone other than a fellow juror when the jury is assembled, or seeking information from external sources, undermines the integrity of a jury trial.
For this reason, jurors will be given clear warnings throughout the trial process. The breaking of the rules can lead to a prison sentence for a juror.
A trial starts with twelve jurors
A jury trial will always start with twelve jurors. The trial can’t start with fewer jurors.
There are many reasons, however, leading to a trial not always finishing with twelve. Jurors may become sick and be unable to return. In some rare cases they may be removed from a jury due to some misconduct during the trial. As long as the number of jurors does not fall below nine then a lawful verdict can be reached.
The unanimous verdict
At all times, the Judge presiding over the trial will be seeking a unanimous verdict from the jury. This is a verdict upon which all of the jurors are agreed, whether that is guilty or not guilty.
In the early stages of jury deliberation a Judge is prevented by law from accepting a majority verdict. There will, however, be a time when a majority decision is permissible. The timing of when that will be will depend very much on the facts of the particular case.
When a majority verdict becomes permissible the jury will be brought back into court by the judge and advised accordingly. Even at that stage, however, the jurors will be asked to continue to try and arrive at a unanimous verdict if that is possible. If this is not possible, then a majority verdict will be acceptable.
Deadlock
In some cases it will become apparent to the Judge that the jury cannot reach a verdict, even a majority one. The Judge will often find this out because the jury will write a note explaining the situation. The contents of that note will usually not be shared with the advocates. This is because it will often ‘contain numbers’, meaning how many jurors are voting one way or the other. Such notes remain confidential in all jury trials.
When a deadlock occurs the judge will provide them with a ‘give and take’ direction. This calls upon all of the jurors to use their collective wisdom to reach a decision.
The Decision reached
If the jury reaches a unanimous verdict then the issue is settled. If not, and the time is appropriate for a majority verdict, a majority may be acceptable.
Whether a majority verdict is acceptable depends on the balance of votes. This will in turn depend on how many jurors remain deciding the trial.
The combinations are:
Where there are 12 jurors: 11 – 1 or 10 – 2
If there are 11 jurors: 10 -1
When there are 10 jurors: 9 – 1
Where the jury falls to nine jurors, only a unanimous verdict will be acceptable.
If the verdict is not guilty, the defendant is free to leave court assuming that there are no other matters remaining to be dealt with. When the verdict is guilty, the judge will move on to consider sentencing the defendant.
Back to deadlock?
In the cases where, despite further deliberation, it becomes clear that the jury is deadlocked then the jury will be discharged. The trial will be over.
In these circumstances, the prosecution may either proceed with a new trial or abandon the trial. This may be because the trial has exposed weaknesses in the prosecution evidence.
How we can assist in your case
We know that the trial process can be difficult, both for our clients and their families. We will work hard at all stages of that process to explain what stage has been reached, what is going on and what will happen next.
It is your case and you ought not to be reduced to a mere bystander as the legal process occurs around you.
Because we are experienced trial lawyers, we do not lose sight of the person behind the proceedings.
Contact an expert lawyer for a jury trial
We offer Crown Court advocacy and litigation expertise from all of our six offices across the East Midlands. While we are most regularly preparing cases to be heard before Nottingham and Derby Crown Courts we provide nationwide coverage.
The trial was heard at Nottingham Crown Court and finally resolved in our client’s favour.
‘Investigation’ followed a familiar pattern…
The case followed a familiar pattern. The paedophile hunter had posted comments in various online chat rooms posing as a teenage girl. A person using the profile of our client had made contact and begun a sexually inappropriate conversation including sending explicit images. The paedophile hunter then arranged a meeting between the person and the girl.
Of course, if the person went to meet the child then instead he would be confronted by the vigilante. The confrontation would then be filmed and posted on social media. It is only then that the police are called.
…until nobody turned up at the meeting
This case was different, however, in that nobody turned up to the meeting apart from the hunters. They made visits to our client’s address but again to no avail. This did not prevent them posting their allegations on social media despite the fact they lacked the final part of the jigsaw to say who was responsible.
The police were eventually called and our client was arrested. Following interview he was charged with the attempts to contact children to send or receive sexual images. (((check the offences))))). It transpired that his profile had been used in three separate contacts with children.
Defence set out very early on in proceedings
Our client set out his defence very early on. He stated that he was not responsible for the messaging and that somebody else had been using his profile although he could not say who. On his behalf, Caine told the court and the prosecution that the mobile phone handsets used by his client and the paedophile hunters would need to be examined by the defence bearing in mind the defence.
The evidence provided so far was in the form of screenshots rather than the individual messages within the applications. An analysis of both the applications and WhatsApp conversations would be necessary. The prosecution’s own telecommunications expert confirmed that such an examination would be necessary to look at the source and provenance of the messages.
One handset missing – but whose fault?
Andrew and Caine became increasingly concerned about whether the defence would have an opportunity to examine the handsets. Eventually, in relation to two sets of allegations, the prosecution confirmed that they did not have the phone. The key witness, the paedophile hunter, gave a statement stating that he had handed the phone to the police. The police denied that this was the case.
It appeared unlikely that the hunter was telling the truth as neither his original statement nor that of the officers contained any reference to a phone being received into evidence.
Delayed access for our expert witness
In relation to the final set of offences, the police only permitted access a week before the trial. The report received cast doubt on police evidence that certain photographs to be found in the screenshots of chats were recovered from our client’s phone handset. Andrew had been unable to find them and nor could our expert.
Andrew prepared skeleton arguments. The first was in relation to whether the prosecution ought to be allowed to carry on with the first two sets of proceedings. There had been a failure by the police to secure key evidence. We had been unable to properly examine the device that was the source of the screen shots.
Secondly, the Crown needed to apply to amend the indictment to add the final set of charges. The evidence did not appear to support the addition of these new charges as key photographic images had not been found on our client’s handset, despite police assertions to the contrary.
No-show of paedophile hunter at trial
The prosecution succeeded in its application to add two new charges to the indictment.
However, the witness who was responsible for the missing handset failed to attend court on the first day of the trial. He left a message that he would not be attending, but when further information was sought he refused to answer his phone or respond to messages.
Wisely the prosecution chose not to proceed with the first five charges.
Significant failure in disclosure of evidence by prosecution
Time had to be spent in resolving the issue of the missing photographs for the remaining two charges. It transpired that when our expert had examined the phone of the other paedophile hunter the police had not prepared their own download so no detailed analysis was possible within the timescale allowed by the police.
Further, both our expert and Andrew had only been given half the download of our client’s own handset. The images recovered from the memory card had not been supplied. As a result, at lunchtime on the first day of the trial Andrew was served with two further discs. The first was the contents of the memory card. This amounted to over 36 000 images contained within 12 500 pages of PDF pages.
The second disc was password protected and was the download disc for the paedophile hunter’s phone.
Somebody else’s holiday photos
During the evening, Andrew began to look at the contents of the memory card. It became clear that the photographs in the main did not belong to his client. There were hundreds of holiday photos that did not show his client. As the phone was brought second hand then it was assumed that these were the photos of the previous owner. The photos were not in date order and not catalogued in a way that would allow them to be examined so Andrew abandoned his analysis.
Password given by police was wrong
Andrew was unable to view the contents of the password protected disc. The following morning it became clear why. The police had missed a crucial digit from the password. When Andrew was able to open the disc at the start of day two of the trial he was faced with a further 1800 thumbnail images that were again not catalogued in a way that permitted analysis in the timescale of the trial.
Legal argument on abuse of process
As a result, Andrew prepared a further argument that maintained that it would be an abuse of the process of the court to permit the prosecution to proceed. Alternatively, Andrew argued that all of the evidence of the chats and the photographs should be excluded for unfairness under section 78 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.
The Judge agreed with Andrew’s abuse of process argument and stayed the proceedings. She agreed with Andrew’s submission that in cases that were begun by amateur detectives such as paedophile hunters it was incumbent on the police and the prosecution to ensure that thereafter the defendant had the protection of the relevant law and rules.
Here our client was unable to have his case properly presented, even in relation to the last two charges, as the prosecution had not made early disclosure of relevant evidence in a way that permitted it to be examined and challenged. Neither Andrew or the defence expert had been able to prepare a proper challenge to the evidence in the case. Our client was unable to have a fair trial.
Proceedings were stayed and our client was discharged. The judge made the point that even if she were wrong to have stayed proceedings, she would have agreed with the application to exclude all of the evidence upon which the prosecution could found the case. The case would have ended in a similar way for our client.
Crown Court legal Aid ensured free representation
Our client had the benefit of legal aid. This ensured that he did not have to pay for the representation of either Caine or Andrew. Further, he did not have to pay for what was an expensive analysis of the handsets in this case. More about Crown Court legal aid can be found here.
Instruct an expert in defending Crown Court cases
VHS Fletchers offices for Crown Court case preparation
We have lawyers skilled in defending Crown Court trials at all of our six offices across the East Midlands. Please find the office nearest to you here. VHS Fletchers will provide nationwide advice and representation, whether that is in police interview, before the Magistrates or at the Crown Court.
New recruit, Chesterfield Criminal defence solicitor Denney Lau, has hit the ground running in his first seven days at VHS Fletchers. His caseload perhaps illustrates the varied and unexpected nature of an experienced criminal law specialist.
Chesterfield criminal defence solicitor Denney Lau
Day 1
On day 1 Denney represented three clients before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court. All three had the benefit of criminal legal aid.
The first client denied possession of bladed article. The case was suitable for summary trial and a trial has been listed at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court. A second client faced an allegation of theft. It was inappropriate to make progress so Denney successfully argued for an adjournment.
The final client of the day faced allegation of attempted robbery and possession of a bladed article. This was a case that could only be dealt with at the Crown Court, so the case was sent there. His client remained on bail.
Day 2
Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court
Day two say Denney again at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court. He dealt with two clients under the legal aid scheme. One defendant pleaded guilty to breaching a restraining order and was fined. A second was in breach of a community order and received a similar financial penalty.
Denney also represented a client under the Chesterfield court duty solicitor scheme. He face a charge of harassment. A not guilty plea was entered so the case adjourned for trial. Denney is awaiting further instructions
Day 3
Once again Denney was representing a client before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court. This time his client was facing allegations of burglary and possession of a bladed article. The allegations were denied and therefore were allocated to Derby Crown Court for trial. His client remained on bail. Representation was given under criminal legal aid
Day 4
Denney represented a client in custody under the legal aid scheme. He was in breach of both a restraining order and his previous community order. He had, unfortunately, run out of chances so received a fourteen week sentence.
Separately Denney dealt with a client as duty solicitor. This client had unpaid fines dating back to 2010 so was at risk of being sent to prison for default. Instead, Denney secured him a further opportunity to pay under a suspended committal order.
Day 5
Avoiding court in the morning, Denney instead provided advice and assistance under a fixed fee arrangement to a suspect being interviewed by the Department of Works and Pensions on suspicion of benefit fraud. No decision was made as to whether to prosecute.
In the afternoon, Denney was representing a client before Sheffield Magistrates’ Court who was denying a serious sexual offence. The case was allocated to Sheffield Crown Court. His client had the benefit of both legal aid and bail.
Day 6
An application to adjourn a dishonesty offence was made and granted before the Magistrates. A legal aid application was submitted.
A new client was seen in the office facing an allegation of excess alcohol. Legal representation at the future court date was possible because of an affordable fixed fee.
That evening Denney undertook his first period on call and dealt with three cases during the night at Chesterfield police station. Two clients facing investigation for a serious sexual offence and possession of drugs with intent to supply were released under investigations so that the police could conclude their enquiries.
A third client was charged to Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court following admissions to an assault on paramedics.
Chesterfield police station
Day 7
The day started with a meeting at the Derbyshire Law Centre in Chesterfield. Chesterfield crime solicitor Ben Strelley also attended. It was an important opportunity to discuss the legal services offered by both us and the Law Centre to ensure that our clients have the opportunity to access legal advice for all of their problems.
Thereafter, Denney has another busy day at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court. He dealt with a defendant as court duty solicitor who pleaded guilty to having a dog that was dangerously out of control. A basis of plea was put forward that was not accepted by the prosecution so a trial of issue of Newton hearing was listed. Denney awaits further instructions.
He concluded a case by way of a conditional discharge for a client in possession of the controlled substance, Mamba.
A second client had committed a new offence of criminal damage while subject to a suspended sentence. Despite that the order was allowed to continue and he was given unpaid work for the new offence.
Finally, Denney made representations on behalf of a client that persuaded the probation service to withdraw proceedings for breach of a suspended sentence order.
Contact Chesterfield criminal defence solicitor Denney Lau
Chesterfield criminal defence solicitor Denney Lau
Although you can see that Denney is busy, he is never too busy to take your call and represent you in police interview or at court.
We know that Denney’s clients will expect him to see their cases through to the end. As a result, he will aim to provide continuity of representation all the way through to your Crown Court trial.
Chesterfield criminal defence solicitor Denney Lau can be contacted on 01246 283000 or you can use the contact form below.
VHS Fletchers Solicitors have six offices across the East Midlands, 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 at VHS Fletchers will happily travel much further to give nationwide criminal advice and representation to our client’s accused of criminal acts.
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands
Within the last few months staff from our Chesterfield office have had many early mornings and late nights travelling the length and breadth of the country to provide our clients with the expert legal advice that they have come to expect.
We travel to give nationwide criminal advice and representation
Those places recently visited by the staff from our Chesterfield office include:
Grimsby Police Station
Harrogate Police Station
South Sefton (Liverpool) Magistrates’ Court
Newport Magistrates’ Court
South Shields Magistrates’ Court
Grimsby Magistrates’ Court
Leeds Magistrates’ Court
Norwich Magistrates’ Court
Sheffield Magistrates’ Court
All of our Clients involved in these cases had links to the Chesterfield area. They firstly wanted a solicitor local to them rather than to the police station or court they had to attend. They also didn’t want a solicitor or other representative that they did not know or trust.
As such they asked whether a member of our Chesterfield criminal defence team would be prepared to travel and provide them with expert legal advice about their cases. We were only to happy to do so. These clients faced a range of offences including assault, escaping from lawful custody, possession of offensive weapons or road traffic offences.
As we have a contract with the government to provide criminal legal aid advice and representation then our advice in the police station will always be free of charge to you.
Many of our clients will be entitled to legal aid in the Magistrates’ Court. Nearly all will be eligible for Crown Court legal aid.
Instruct a firm to go that extra mile
You may choose your solicitor by reputation. You might want to choose a solicitor with an office near to where you live, no matter where your case will be heard.
If you require the assistance of a firm of expert criminal defence solicitors who are more than happy to travel to provide you with nationwide criminal advice and representation, then look no further than VHS Fletchers.
We will go that extra mile (or if need be the hundreds of extra miles) needed to ensure that you get the best outcome possible. Please contact our Chesterfield Office day or night, 365 days a year on 01246 283000. Alternatively you can use the form below.
Senior crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier recently represented a client appearing for Crown Court trial at Leicester Crown Court. He faced an extremely serious charge of wounding with intent, contrary to section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
Negotiation resolved the case to our client’s satisfaction.
Section 18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861
The allegation was made more serious by a number of factors. Our client had not acted alone but with another to assault the victim. Although fists were used to begin with, the victim was then assaulted with a knife. Finally, the offence took place in a student halls of residence, so the victim had been assaulted in their own home.
Some of the incident had been captured on CCTV.
The complainant received two black eyes, a cut above his eye that required stitches, a broken nose and fractured cheek bone.
Sarah’s client was of good character with no convictions or even cautions recorded against him. He was a student himself.
Sentencing Guidelines
Following conviction after trial the sentencing guidelines would have suggested that a starting point of six years in prison, within a range of five to nine years. Arguably this could have been categorised as a ‘sustained assault’ which would have made the sentence even longer.
An alternate plea to a lesser charge
On the day of trial our client was represented by barrister Nick Bechey from Great James Street chambers. We received instructions to offer a plea to the lesser charge under section 20 Offences Against the Person Act 1861. This offer of plea was accepted by the prosecution.
As a result, the judge had a greater flexibility on sentence and instead of a lengthy prison sentence our client received a suspended sentence with community elements. He was very pleased and relieved with the outcome.
Negotiation secured a favourable basis of plea and sentence.
Crown court trial for serious drug offences
Our client faced trial with four others for drug offences. She was charged with conspiracy to supply cannabis. A large amount of cannabis had been found in three houses and the boot of a car. All defendants were connected by a family relationship.
Specifically, our client was said to have helped with the growing of the cannabis as well as the onward supply. Although our client accepted growing cannabis she maintained that this was for her own use. It was medicinal as she suffered from severe arthritis. Sarah obtained a medical report from her doctor to back up this assertion.
Unfortunately, the prosecution was not prepared to accept what she had said. They maintained that she had a key role in what was a substantial conspiracy. The case was listed for a ten day trial for all defendants including our client.
On the morning of trial there was movement on behalf of both our client and the prosecution. She was prepared to accept involvement on the basis that her house had been used to grow the cannabis. her route into cannabis use and this offending remained the same – her illness.
As a result of these negotiations the court was able to sentence our client far more leniently that would otherwise have been the case. Despite her late plea, William persuaded the judge to impose a sentence of only four months but suspend it. As a result, as long as our client complies with the community element of the order and does not commit further offences then she will not have to serve the sentence.
Basis of plea and sentencing guidelines
Crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier
The basis upon which our clients are sentenced will always be very important. This is particularly true in cases involving drug supply as the sentencing guidelines can be particularly unforgiving.
For example, whether you have a significant or leading role in a relatively small scale operation supplying cannabis can make a difference of three years to the starting point for sentence.
In this particular case, because of the guidelines, the starting point for the judge in considering sentence would have been twelve months. Bearing in mind the lateness of the plea, William was able to persuade the judge to reduce the sentence dramatically to the sentence finally imposed.
The government has been called upon to reverse the erosion of the UK citizen’s access to justice represented by further unjustified legal aid cuts. The latest of these cuts relate to the fees that are paid under the Litigators Graduated Fee Scheme (“LGFS”).
These cuts will now makes much of the more serious criminal legal aid work uneconomical. It will cause a risk to a fair trial by restricting preparation for Crown Court trials. It will reduce a client’s access to a local provider of legal aid services if not immediately then certainly over the period of the next few years.
Why is this important?
The cuts to access to justice for those facing criminal prosecutions must be reversed before the disaster that has occurred to the availability of representation for civil legal aid cases is repeated.
It is essential to halt the erosion of access to legal representation in the UK. Citizens, of course, face the full might of a state funded investigation and prosecution.
This constant erosion of legal aid eligibility and rates of pay over the last twenty years or so must strike at the heart of our democracy. It has the effect of destabilising the level playing field that justice requires. It increasingly divides the nation between those wealthy enough to buy legal services and the rest who increasingly are forced to act in person.
This socially divisive policy is a false economy that causes delay and unplanned expense.The present cuts are imposed despite a steady reduction in legal aid expenditure. The total bill to the government of legal aid has fallen by a third since 2011.
A Great Justice System? For who?
These cuts come at a time when the Government is attempting to present a positive image internationally for our legal services. The damage to our reputation in relation to access to justice may in fact be immense.
The Bach Commission recently reported into the effects of legal aid cuts. Appendix 5: of the report outlines some stark conclusions
Cuts to the fees paid under the Litigators Graduated Fee Scheme make much of criminal legal aid work uneconomical
The rate of remuneration for advocates in many hearings often falls below the minimum wage.
The application of the merits and means tests for legal aid in the magistrates’ court and Crown Court prevents deserving clients receiving representation and causes delay
The number of offices handling legal aid criminal work has reduced by 20% in recent years
Legal advice deserts are being created and increasingly those denied Justice will beat a path to MP’s surgeries in desperation.
This petition calls upon the government to reverse the cuts and engage in discussions for meaningful reform of the criminal justice system and its funding. It may be that sufficient interest can be generated by the forthcoming review on the effect of legal aid cuts, in combination with pressure from things such as this petition, to effect real change.
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
Senior Crown Court litigator Caine Ward
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.
Andrew’s client had already been dealt with by another advocate following his guilty plea to his involvement in an insurance fraud where he had pleaded guilty.
Crown Court jury trial for perverting the course of justice
This case was related to the fraud. It was said that our client had destroyed an iPhone because it had incriminating photos showing fraudulent accidents. The phone had been destroyed after our client had been arrested so the police wouldn’t find it.
The only evidence that the prosecution had that the phone existed in the first place, let alone was destroyed, came from an ex-partner. In her statement the incident was dealt with in two or three lines of type so no detail was given at all.
Disclosure was received from the prosecution that showed that she was unhappy with our client following the break up of their relationship. Further evidence obtained showed that following the break up she had made several unwanted visits to our client’s address. On each occasion the police had to be called, and on more than one occasion she had to be taken away by the police. This, and evidence of her hatred for our client seen on screenshots of Messenger conversations, lent support to our client’s argument that she had made up the story to get him into further trouble with the police.
Expert cross-examination of the prosecution witness
The case proceeded to jury trial. The witness attended so gave her evidence in accordance with her statement. Andrew had planned his cross examination so that he concentrated on relevant issues. It was structured to deal with the following areas:
their relationship and how it ended
police involvement at our client’s address
her feelings for our client as seen on the Messenger chat
her delay in reporting the allegations to the police
the detail of the incident bearing in mind the brevity of her statement
The last point was perhaps the most important. When pressed for detail she was unable to provide it or seemed to be making up the detail to provide an answer. This was not lost on the jury.
Andrew’s client gave evidence on his own behalf, and although the experience and some of the questions asked were clearly frustrating, he gave evidence well.
Closing speech directed at the burden of proof
In closing, Andrew’s speech was able to concentrate on the issues that might be troubling the jury most. In particular, there was a lack of supporting evidence that such a phone ever ever existed whereas there was evidence that the witness might be prepared to lie about him.
Our client, of course, had the benefit of the fact that the prosecution had to prove the case so that the jury was sure of his guilt. By a unanimous verdict the jury decided that the prosecution hadn’t done so and he was found ‘not guilty’.
Positive feedback for the service we provide
Although our client remains a serving prisoner and was unable to offer written feedback on the service provided his family did so. His partner felt able to write in these terms
“I couldn’t of asked for a better solicitor – Andrew Wesley and team did a fantastic job representing my partner.”
His mother watched the trial so was able to comment
“couldn’t of asked for better representation thank you so much.”
Crown Court Criminal Legal Aid
Our client benefited from legal aid so in his case it meant that our representation was free of charge. It is only in exceptional cases that legal aid funding will not be available to a defendant. This is because it is unlikely that the income of most defendants be too high for legal aid.
Contact a Nottingham Criminal Defence Solicitor
VHS Fletchers East Midlands Offices
Whether you face a police investigation, Magistrates’ Court trial or Crown Court jury trial you will want to engage a specialist firm to ensure the best possible outcome for you. We provide nationwide advice and representation from our offices across the East Midlands. Contact details for your nearest office can be found here.
Alternatively you can use the form below to send us an enquiry.
Of course, it might be thought a great pity that she chose to write to the newspaper first, rather than the person wrongly accused of rape.
First the jury would hear the complainant in alleging that she was a victim of serious sexual crime. The jury would then hear the position of the young man in question who had always stated that that it was all consensual.
The sadness, in this case, is that it could have been avoided. This is because Mr Allan raised the issue of text messages in his police interview. His account was ignored. Instead, the officer in the case went on to also ignore clear guidelines on Crown Court disclosure. Although the police had the text messages he did not bring them to the attention of the prosecuting barrister.
Because we are acutely aware of these problems and the risks to your case of a failure of Crown Court disclosure, all of our staff work relentlessly to ensure that all relevant evidence is revealed by the police and the prosecution.
