Tag Archives: Crown Court

News

Section 18 GBH Trial at Nottingham – Not Guilty Verdict

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant

Nottingham solicitor advocate Phil Plant recently represented a client before Nottingham Crown Court who face the serious allegation of inflicting Grievous Bodily Harm with Intent (Section 18 GBH).  After trial, he was found not guilty.

Assault Following False Allegations

Phil’s client was said, along with a co-accused, to have taken part in a brutal revenge attack on the victim following false allegations that he had assaulted a female friend.

The victim had been so badly beaten that was so badly beaten he suffered a displaced fractured of the jaw.  It also led to him suffering  almost total amnesia and his recollection was based on harrowing flashbacks of the incident that continued to haunt him.

Lesser Charge Instead of Section 18 GBH?

Upon conviction, our client could expect a substantial period of imprisonment.  The prosecution had told us that it would accept a plea to the lesser charge of inflicting GBH (Section 20 rather than section 18 GBH).  Phil’s client insisted that he was not involved at all, so chose to have his trial.

The victim asserted that the the complainant named both of the accused as the perpetrators of the attack.  Phil’s client did not accept that he was part of the attack, although he did witness it.

When questioned by Phil the complainant conceded that his client was not the kind of man who would behave in the manner he described, conceding perhaps that it appeared unlikely that his client did indeed take part in the attack.

The other defendant had given given different accounts during the course of the investigation.  At trial he maintained that it was our client who had carried out the assault.

Not Guilty Verdict

Having heard evidence tested through Phil’s expert cross-examination the jury found his client not guilty.  The other accused, separately represented, was convicted of the original offence and received a significant custodial sentence of several years.

Contact Phil Plant

If you wish to instruct Phil to represent you at trial before Nottingham Crown Court then please contact him on 0115 9599550 or email him here.

News

Better Case Management – A Damning Report?

A report from HM Crown Prosecution Inspectorate entitled Better Case Management: A Snapshot has been published this month.

What is Better Case Management?

Better Case ManagementBetter Case Management (BCM) is a judicially driven initiative. It is intended that the program save resources, time and therefore money in terms of court hearings and file preparation.

It requires a number of steps to be taken in good time to progress cases early and prior to the first Crown Court hearing – the Plea and Trial Preparation Hearing (PTPH). This primarily requires action by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) – timely service of the prosecution evidence, Indictment and PTPH form by uploading them to the Digital Case System (DCS).

There needs to be early engagement with the defence representatives following service to enable issues to be properly identified. Those cases that can be dealt with by way of an early guilty plea following negotiation are expected to be identified by both parties at an early stage.

The first Plea and Trial Preparation Hearings were listed in February 2016 following the January roll out and the roll out of the Digital Case File which commenced in spring 2016 and was completed that May.

Inspectors visited five of the early adopter courts and the court observations in July 2016 took place within seven months of national roll out of BCM at the other 25 court centres visited during the fieldwork. The report is fairly described as a ‘snapshot’ and is hopeful that further progress will have been made since July.

Key Principles

The CPS identified ten key principles against which success can be judged. Unfortunately, the report appears to identify significant problems:

  • Despite this being a national process, levels of compliance for some aspects of the scheme were as low as 10%
  • Cases are not reviewed properly by the Crown either before the first Magistrates’ Court hearing or after sending to the Crown Court
  • The police are charging cases in breach of guidance on charging without challenge from the CPS
  • Limited evidence of CPS file ownership
  • Although generally sufficient material was uploaded this was not always within the BCM timescales
  • CCTV cannot be uploaded to the system and is not always available for a hearing
  • Little evidence of active engagement between parties prior to the PTPH, with these deficiencies going unchallenged by the judiciary
  • The absence of engagement results in additional hearings rather than fewer hearings
  • PTPH hearings often had more emphasis on the timetabling process rather than being an informed discussion of the issues
  • The CPS need to improve significantly if it is to contribute to the success of the initiative

The Future?

There is a broad view that Better Case Management and digital service is a positive innovation in terms of being able to provide early advice to those facing criminal proceedings. We view it as a positive step forward. It is, however, dependent on the CPS maintaining focus on the initiative with a view to driving the improvements needed above.

The report appears optimistic that this is achievable, but we will have to wait and see.

The full report can be found here.

News

Peer Review Confirms Our Client Focus

A Peer Review is a requirement of our contract with the Legal Aid Agency.  A random selection of files are made.  A reviewer will examine how we have dealt with client matters across all of our offices.  vhs fletchers peer reviewThis process is purely on the basis of the information recorded by our lawyers on the files supplied.

Our clients will know that we have worked very hard to ensure consistency of approach whether you see a solicitor at Nottingham, Derby, Chesterfield, Mansfield or Ilkeston.  We are pleased to be able to report that the reviewer agreed that we have been successful.

Following the random sampling, a number of positive aspects of our service were identified by the independent reviewer.

“Good Outcomes for Clients”

The adjudicator found evidence that we are “securing good outcomes for clients in all categories of work” – at the police station, Magistrates’ and Crown Courts.  These were evidenced by clients being refused charge, having the benefit of submissions of no case to answer or receiving sentences that were a significant departure from the published guidelines.

“Timely and Realistic Advice”

The reviewer noted that as a firm we ensured that our clients are “given timely and realistic advice about the strength of the evidence against them”.  We showed that this advice allowed clients to secure the maximum available credit for early guilty pleas.  Indications of culpability for lesser charges were given early, again maintaining credit when the Crown finally accepted the account given by our client.

“Pro-active”

“Pro-active steps were taken” to seek full instructions early in cases to allow the early drafting of, for example, a basis of plea, that was agreed with the prosecution prior to the first Crown Court hearing.  This allowed the client to be sentenced in a manner favourable to him.

“Readily Understandable Advice”

Our “clients were given clear and readily understandable advice about the strengths and weaknesses of the prosecution and defence cases and their prospects at trial”.  Our clients “were able to make fully informed decisions about their case”, with the advice given in plain English and clear, readily understandable terms.

“Actively Pursued Disclosure”

These strengths were combined with our “pro-active approach to the preparation and management of cases”.  It was observed that we “actively pursued outstanding disclosure issues” on behalf of clients, whether cases were at the Magistrates’ or Crown Court.  The strengths or weaknesses of the prosecution or defence cases were kept under constant review.

“Client Focussed Approach”

Our approach to managing client appointments, the provision of advice in person and in writing and our regular updates on cased “increased the prospects of our clients engaging in the preparation of their cases and provided further evidence of our client focussed approach”.

Contact Us

vhs fletchers locations
Our Offices

VHS Fletchers have offices across the East Midlands.  We offer representation in criminal cases from the police station through to the Court of Appeal.  Independent reviews of the quality of our advice such as these can give you confidence in instructing this firm to represent you.

Please find you nearest office here, or email us here.  We look forward to hearing from you.

News

Firearm Minimum Sentence Avoided

Nottingham based senior Crown Court litigator Laura Clarson worked with counsel Dean Kershaw of No 5 Chambers to avoid a firearm minimum sentence of five years.

The Allegation

Laura’s client was stopped in customs at Birmingham airport.  He had arrived from Turkey where he had been working for a period of a few months.   His luggage was searched and he was found to be in possession of 3 tasers or stun guns.  These were disguised as torches.

As a result he was charged with possession of three disguised firearm under Section 5(1A)(a) of the Firearms Act 1968.   This meant that he was liable for a minimum sentence of five years custody.  This sentence could only be avoided if ‘exceptional circumstances’ applied.

Our client maintained throughout that he bought them from a market in Istanbul believing them to be torches.  He intended to keep one and give the others as gifts. He did not appreciate they also operated as stun guns.  Click here to see the items:

Disguised Stun Gun

Laura gave the difficult advice to the client, that as he knew that he had the items he was guilty of the offence.  His lack of knowledge as to how the items operated did not provide a defence.  He sought a second opinion from another firm of solicitors – in their rush to be optimistic, and perhaps tell him what he wanted to hear, the advice was legally incorrect.

Exceptional Circumstances

At the first Crown Court hearing our client pleaded guilty but on the basis set out to the police in interview.  The case was adjourned for a hearing as to whether he could be sentenced on that basis.  Counsel provided continuity of representation, despite being involved in a trial at the time.

Evidence was given by the client and submissions were made by Counsel.  Having heard from our client, the Judge was able to sentence him on a basis favourable to him.  Exceptional circumstances were said to apply, and in combination with extensive mitigation the Judge was able to impose a free-standing suspended sentence rather than the firearm minimum sentence of five years.

Laura’s client was relieved, being able to keep his employment and a roof over his head!

Contact Laura

Sometimes we have to give you difficult advice.  Even when we do that, you can be confident that we will continue to fight for the best outcome possible in your case.  If you wish to discuss a case involving a firearm minimum sentence or any other case with Laura please telephone 0115 9599550 or email her here.

She will provide you with advice on every aspect of your case, from funding, through to evidence, and likely outcome so that you can make the best choices.

News

Historic Sex Allegation Trial

Senior Crown Court litigator Lisa Sawyer recently worked with counsel Michael Levy from  2 Bedford Row  Chambers to successfully defend a client against an historic sex allegation.

Defending an historic sex allegation

The offence was said to have taken place 10 years ago.  The incident wasn’t reported to the police until 2015. Such delays make the preparation of such cases more difficult. Memories are likely to fade and helpful witnesses will be difficult to locate.

The client maintained that any sexual activity was consensual.  He had had recent contact with the complainant on social media which the prosecution claimed indicated that he accepted committing the offences.

Lisa’s client knew that he faced very serious offences.  He was aware that a conviction would not only have an effect on him, but also his family and friends.

The Preparation

Although the case was in Nottingham, our client lived in Glasgow and he wished representation from counsel based in London.  He also had some learning difficulties and was dyslexic.  The geographical and personal complications meant that Lisa had to spend the time necessary to ensure that the client was happy with his instructions including:

  • two lengthy meetings over several hours to take the client through the papers and seek instructions
  • preparing typed instructions and giving the client the time to consider and amend them
  • attend conference with counsel and client in London
  • spend additional time explaining the trial process
  • attending the trial throughout

Lisa’s command of the case and knowledge of the client meant that she was able to reassure the client as to the preparation being undertaken on his case and assist counsel with a steer towards the relevant aspects of the case.

The Verdict

The client gave evidence well before the jury, and after four days the jury returned a not guilty verdict, to the relief of the client.

Historic sex allegation solicitor
Nottingham Crown Court

The preparation and outcome of this case demonstrates that advice and preparation from an experienced litigator on combination with the right advocate can ensure the best outcome for clients.

Contact a Crown Court defence specialist
Senior Crown Court Litigator Lisa Sawyer

Some further information about how we will prepare to defend your case here.  Although our offices are based in the East Midlands we will prepare nationwide representation.  You can find your nearest office here.

If you face an historic sex allegation or any other matter to be dealt with before the Crown Court then please contact Lisa on 0115 9599550.  Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Contact

News

Derbyshire Solicitor Feedback

Recently we outlined details of a client’s case here where both a contested hearing and immediate custody were avoided.  Derbyshire Solicitor Advocate William Bennett and Senior Crown Court Litigator Ruth Campbell dealt with the case.

Our client has taken the time to complete our client feedback questionnaire and declared that she was ‘very satisfied’ with our overall level of service.  Our ‘excellent service’ needed no improvement.

Her comments were all the more pleasing as she had previously dealt with Banner Jones solicitors whose criminal staff and case load we took on in April 2015.

VHS Fletchers Crime Solicitors Chesterfield

She went on to say that VHS Fletchers would be a first choice of recommendation to anyone who would need an ‘excellent firm of solicitors’.

The form was not enough for the client to spell out the level of service she felt she received, and she continued on an additional sheet to set out that the help and advice of William and Ruth throughout the case was ‘extremely helpful and 100% brilliant’.  She remarked on Ruth’s compassion and understanding, and felt that without this support and advice she would have ‘crashed’.  Our help allowed her to ‘remain strong’.

Aside from being relieved about the outcome, our client is taking full advantage of all of the opportunities that the court sentence is affording her.  She is receiving excellent help from her probation officer, due to meet with Addaction, and has managed to cut her alcohol intake by half.

Derbyshire Solicitor Feedback

We will always welcome feedback. Positive feedback will show staff that they are doing things right, whereas constructive feedback will show us, as a firm, where we need to change to continue to improve the first class service that we try to give all of our clients.

If you have a case that you wish to discuss with a Derbyshire solicitor then please contact your most convenient office.  You can contact Ruth by email or William Bennett here.

News

Not Guilty Verdict for Client

Senior Crown Court Litigator Laura Clarson prepared a case for a not guilty verdict.  Her client faced two allegations of dwelling house burglary, aggravated vehicle taking and simple taking of a vehicle without the owners consent.  If found guilty he would have received at least 3 years in prison.

Taken at face value, the evidence would appear extremely strong.  The client had been arrested having been traced to where he was hiding behind a car by a police dog.

The police had recovered two watches stolen from the burglary.  This had been committed less than an hour before the client’s arrest.  They were found next to a gate that Laura’s client had jumped over during the pursuit

Keys from a vehicle taken was found under the car our client was hiding behind. When searched he was also in possession of a mask and gloves.

The defence of the case was made that much more difficult by the fact that our client had a substantial record of previous convictions for burglary offence and vehicle taking.

Laura’s client was passionate in his denials of the allegation.  He maintained that a second person was responsible for the offending rather than him.  Presentation of this defence was potentially hampered by the fact that he failed to give this explanation at the police station when represented by another firm of solicitors.

Her preparation, on her client’s instructions, began to show how the prosecution case was perhaps not as strong as it first looked and a not guilty verdict could be secured.

The following points were usefully made:

  • A second male was present although police officers could not agree about that fact
  • The dog handler could have traced the second male had pursuing officers mentioned him
  • Although there were eye witnesses, identification parades did not take place as Laura’ client did not match the descriptions
  • Defence established that a second male had had these allegations ‘taken into consideration’ when sentenced earlier

Although emotional about what he said were the lies of the police as to what had happened on that day, Laura’s client gave clear and compelling evidence as to his lack of involvement.  His account was tested by the prosecutor in robust cross examination but our client did not waver.

After a little over five hours the jury returned with a not guilty verdict.  Laura’s client was understandably relieved, and pleased that Laura, his barrister and the jury gave his account the weight that it deserved.

Our client was represented by counsel Dan Bishop from 7 Bedford Row who gave clear and helpful tactical advice on how to best present the case to the jury.  Decisions were made has to how best to cross-examine the police officers (gently or robustly) and whether to call as a witness the person who had admitted the offences upon sentence.  Ultimately, the right decisions were made.

This case demonstrates the benefits of instructing a firm with a specialist Crown Court department.  Laura spends all of her working day preparing the most serious cases that come before the court.  This may be for trials or sentence, but her experience means that she will give each case the attention to detail that it needs.

She will also be able to advise you as to the availability of legal aid.  Information can be found here and here.

If you have a case that you wish to discuss with Laura please contact her at our Nottingham office by telephone 0115 9599550 or by email here.

News

Legal Aid in the Crown Court

Legal Aid is available for defending Crown Court proceedings.  It will always be granted on the merits of the case, but is subject to a means test.  The legal aid certificate can be granted with or without a contribution from your monthly income.

Even if you do not have to pay an income contribution you might have sufficient capital to mean that money is collected from that capital at the conclusion of the case.  Although the monthly income level is set reasonably high, it can be that you will not qualify at all for Crown Court Legal Aid.

Bearing in mind the stress to you that defending proceedings will involve, we recognise that it is important that your defence is affordable.  As a result we will provide you with all of the alternatives available to you in the funding of your case.

An application for legal aid will have several benefits:

  • if you win your case any contributions you make will be returned to you
  • if you are not entitled to legal aid and win your case then you will be able to apply for a proportion of your fees to be repaid from central funds
  • it is likely to make your representation by litigator and advocate more affordable, particularly if the case involves the instruction of expert witnesses

The first step will be to submit an application for legal aid, having taken all of the information necessary for the legal aid means test to be undertaken.  Documentary evidence in support of your income and expenditure will need to be submitted to the Legal Aid Agency (LAA) in due course, but the initial decision will be made upon the basis of the fully completed form.

The initial response from the LAA will indicate whether or not a contribution will be required from your income.  Unfortunately, there will be no indication as to the level of any capital contribution.  This will be calculated at the conclusion of your case if you plead or are found guilty.

When you receive notification of any income contribution it might be that it may appear difficult to afford.  This is because the expenditure that is offset against your income is very limited.  At this stage we will help you decide whether you ought to accept the offer of legal aid.

We will be able to calculate the likely cost of the preparation and the advocacy involved in your case and in many cases will be able to undertake the work on a private basis, but with fees limited to the amount that we would recover from the Legal Aid Agency.

This might be particularly attractive where you know that you will be pleading guilty so will not be entitled to recover costs, your monthly contribution is high and the case is likely to take several months to conclude.

It might be less helpful in a denied matter involving a substantial amount of work and a lengthy trial.

We will take the time to discuss all of your options with you to allow you to make the right decision as to how best to fund your case.  If you have a case you wish to discuss then please contact your nearest office or email us here.

vhs fletchers legal aid logo

News

Feedback from Nottingham Clients

We have started to analyse the client feedback for the Nottingham office, and are again pleased by the positive comments about the individual lawyers and the firm generally.  Although we could not set out all of the positve comments for all of the solicitors, a few comments properly reflect the general tone of those who replied to our request for client feedback.

One client commenting about a Magistrates’ Court case handled by Nick Walsh said ‘I found VHS solicitors more helpful than others.  The solicitor I have is very good at his job.  Very satisfied with the help and information throughout my case’.

Another commented that Nick was ‘understanding, non-judgemental and invaluable in [his] compassion’.  Further clients said of him ‘used previously in a case, brilliant service both times’ and ‘you took time to listen’.

Finbarr Hennessey, a Magistrates’ Court Advocate known for making extra efforts on behalf of his clients,  is described in similar terms by a number of clients – ‘The solicitor I have is very good at his job’, ‘A1 Service thank you’ and ‘Finbarr Hennessy is an excellent solicitor and needs no improvement’.

It is all the more pleasing to note that, despite moving firms to us when Campion & Co solicitors stopped undertaking criminal work that his clients found their way to us and continue to receive the high level of service from Finbarr that they had grown used to.

Senior Crown Court Litigator Caine Ward deals with a high volume of the most serious of cases where the stakes, in terms of outcome, are particularly high.  A similar theme is revealed within the answers to our requests for client feedback – ‘You took the time to listen to us’ and ‘you listen to people and take time to understand even when people get mad’.

Caine is described as ‘Professional, courteous, informative and friendly’ and providing ‘great service, great experience and very professional and friendly’.  As a result another client stated ‘I have recommended people to you’.  The latter is perhaps the greatest compliment, that a client has been pleased with the level of service received and referred others to us.

Derek Brown deals with clients in the police station and before the Magistrates’ Court.  He is described as being ‘comfortable to talk to and very supportive under the circumstances’.  He ‘couldn’t get better’ and ‘helped me understand what was happening’.

In one particular case, Derek was unfortunately unable to provide the usual continuity of representation, but the client view was that the firm offered a ‘good legal team, it was a very good service’.

Finally, Julia Haywood has received feedback that would be unsurprising for all clients that met her.  One client said ‘I thought you were fantastic from day one.  You were very supportive to my family before and after sentence’.  Another mentioned that he was ‘treated with respect and dignity at all times’.

Further clients found Julia ‘helpful and understanding’ and a solicitor who provided ‘a professional service’.

Additional client feedback can be found here and here.

VHS Fletchers would hope that all of these comments demonstrate that we are a firm that you can trust with any matters relating to criminal defence.  If you wish to speak with one of our experienced lawyers please contact your nearest office here or contact us by email here.

VHS Fletchers Nottingham

News

Client Feedback for Chesterfield

We are beginning the process of analysing the client feedback questionnaires that we have received over the last 6 months and will have the full analysis soon.  The comments will soon appear on a testimonials page, but we have taken the view that testimonials should be current and regularly updated.

Client satisfaction is important to us, and of course key to securing of repeat business or referrals onwards to family, friends or associates.

As a result, at the beginning of the process, it is gratifying to note some of the Feedback for the Chesterfield office.  Kevin Tomlinson is described by one client as doing ‘the best for me as I’m sure you do others’.  He describes contact being very easy to make, and previous dealing meant that the client and his family ‘knew we would get good service’.  He offered a ‘big thank you’ for Kevin’s support and honesty.

A second client commented that Kevin provided a ‘courteous, professional service, [feeling] fully represented in a fair and honest way to obtain the best outcome’.  This client has chosen Kevin as advocate on the basis of a favourable review from a neighbour.

Rob Lowe represents clients in the police station.  A client who had chosen to use our firm following an internet search had this to say about Rob – ‘Your help was very good and informative…I have only good comments to make about your service’.

A client who met Rob when he asked for the Duty Solicitor gave the following client feedback:  ‘Rob Lowe was excellent in advising me on everything’ and would be certain to recommend him to others.

David Gittins has only been working in Chesterfield for 15 months and as a result wouldn’t be known to clients who had previously dealt with the criminal department of Banner Jones solicitors who previously undertook criminal work from this office.  As a result, it is pleasing to here that a client of Banner Jones made the following comment about David – ‘Your service to me was excellent and the outcome was better than expected.  Thank you.’

Another client who used David through ‘word of mouth’ described ‘a very good service with no hassle’.

A Crown Court client made full use of the questionnaire to praise Ruth Campbell for the work that she and his in-house barrister Steve Gosnell  undertook on his behalf.  He describes the service as ‘excellent in all areas’ and described how he felt he was treated fairly and that the barrister ‘…was always direct and very professional’.  He was pleased that he had the benefit of legal aid that was free to him, and he extended thanks to everyone involved.

Prospective clients will soon be able to read more client feedback once we have updated the website, in order to be assured of the high level of quality advice and representation that this firm provides across all five offices and nationwide.
VHS Fletchers Chesterfield office