Tag Archives: trial

News

What is a hung jury? What happens next?

Recently, the high profile prosecution of ex-police officer David Duckenfield relating to the Hillsborough tragedy ended without reaching a conclusion. A number of papers reported that there was a hung jury.  So, what does that mean?

In an ideal world, a jury will reach a clear conclusion by either convicting or acquitting the defendant.

Where a case retains the original 12 jurors at least 10 must agree on the verdict.  If the numbers fall short, for example, with 8 wanting to acquit and 4 wanting to convict, that will not be an acceptable verdict.

If the jury indicates that they will not be able to reach a verdict in accordance with the law then then that jury will need to be discharged.

In legal terms, this is often referred to as a hung jury.

What happens if there is a hung jury?

The prosecution can apply to have the defendant tried again.  This will be the outcome in most cases.

The decision is one for the trial Judge who will consider whether or not it is in the interests of justice for a retrial to take place.

Typically, the court considers questions which include (but are not limited to) whether:

  • the alleged offence is sufficiently serious to justify a retrial
  • if re-convicted, the appellant would be likely to serve a significant period or further period in custody
  • the appellant’s age and health
  • the wishes of the victim of the alleged offence.

If prosecutorial misconduct is alleged then other factors will come into play, analogous with whether it is an abuse of process to allow a retrial.

In most cases, the defence will not be able to properly resist the application.  We would, however, always carefully consider all relevant factors and object if able to.

What happens if a second jury still cannot reach a verdict?

The usual practice in this scenario is for the prosecution to offer no evidence, although there are rare circumstances where a further retrial could take place.

Contact an expert in Crown Court representation

We are specialists in Crown Court litigation and advocacy.  You can read about how we prepare for such serious cases here.

Legal aid is likely to be available for defending a Crown Court case.

Here are some of the cases that we have dealt with recently:

Successful defence of a serious robbery in the home.

Successful challenge of expert evidence in drugs case.

Abuse of process in paedophile hunter case.

We have offices across the East Midlands.  From those we provide nationwide advice and representation.

You can find your nearest office here.

hung jury
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

Contact

News

Sexsomnia Defence Successful

 

Senior Crown Court Litigator Lisa Sawyer

Senior Crown Court Litigator Lisa Sawyer based at our Nottingham office, helped achieve trial success after exploring a rather obscure and developing area of defence, sexsomnia.

Her client was charged with two counts of rape and multiple sexual assaults. He denied the offences, putting forward a defence of ‘sexsomnia’ or ‘sexual behaviour in sleep’.

Expert in Sexsomnia

The case involved Lisa instructing perhaps the leading expert in the field, Dr Chris Idzikowski BSc PhD CPsychol FBPsS.  He is President of the Sleep Medicine Section of the Royal Society of Medicine and Director of the Sleep Assessment and Advisory Service.

The area of sleep research and sleep medicine that relate to sexsomnia have only evolved recently, and as a result there are no generally accepted methods to investigate whether sleep-related behaviours have lead to criminal charges.  The preparation of this case involved the client as an inpatient for two nights for a study of his sleep patterns.  The expert was then able to consider:

  • whether the client was capable of involuntary behaviour during sleep
  • to review the behaviour alleged and see whether it could have occurred whilst the person was asleep.

Research has shown that many forms of sexual behaviour can occur whilst an individual is asleep.  Generally the behaviour is simple and rarely includes more complex acts such as intercourse.  In this case the client was said to have committed a rape.

For a proper opinion to be given evidence has to be gained from a number of additional sources – usually historical, such as from a partner, previous partners, friend and relatives.  The key witnesses, however, were the client and his then partner.

Favourable conclusion

Dr Idzikowski was able to conclude that the client had a predisposition to involuntary behaviour during sleep, and that factors existing in the client’s personal life at the time may well have led to the behaviour.  The partner being present was a sufficient trigger for the behaviour, and the timing and behaviour was consistent with ‘parasomniac behaviour’, behaviour whilst asleep, or sexsomnia.

The Crown Prosecution Service attempted to counter this expert evidence with its own doctor flown in from America to give evidence.

Specialist advocacy from independent counsel

Following careful handling of the case by specialist advocate Gary Summer of 9 Bedford Row  the client was found not guilty.

The quality of representation may be of particular importance in rape cases as recent research has shown that many jurors have decided on guilt before they reach the retiring room.

Representation under the Crown Court legal aid

The client had the additional benefit of being in receipt of legal aid which meant that ultimately, because he was successful at trial, the preparation and representation was free of charge to him.  This was of particular importance as the expert fees necessary to prepare the case in his behalf were considerable.

Contact a criminal defence specialist

Sleepwalking cases are important and sensitive cases to deal with. Our specialist lawyers can advise you on whether you have a defence, and help you put that defence forward, advising on prospects of success and instructing experts to help along the way.

As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about a criminal offence then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early legal advice can be found here.

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.  Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

You can read more about the issue of automatism here.

 You can find your nearest office here.

automatism
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

Contact

 

Continue reading Sexsomnia Defence Successful →

News

Robbery in a dwelling trial at Lincoln Crown Court

robbery in a dwelling
Nottingham solicitor advocate Lauren Fisher

Nottingham solicitor advocate Lauren Fisher recently represented a client before Lincoln Crown Court.  He was jointly charged with another with a single allegation of robbery in a dwelling.  Two other defendants were involved in the trial. One defendant had already pleaded guilty to his involvement in two robberies, and our client was jointly charged with one of those robberies.

This was in effect a re-trial, an earlier trial having been abandoned due to the prolonged bad weather.

Robbery in a dwelling house

The charge that affected Lauren’s client was one of robbery in a dwelling.  The prosecution case was that he, along with the co-accused, had attended the house of the victim.  A taser had been produced.  Demands were then made that a large sum of money be transferred using internet banking.  In the event only half the amount was transferred, but the victim was forced to contact the bank by telephone to authorise the transfer.

Afterwards, it was said that our client and the co-accused left the property together.

Lauren’s client accepted that he had been present at the incident.  He had given his friend, the co-accused, a lift to the address and gone in because his friend did not know how long he would be.  At not time had he seen a taser, or hear the noise of one being discharge.  He did not know that money was to be stolen.

Once in the property the co-accused locked the door.  Once he was locked in, our client was unable to leave.  He took no part in the robbery and was as frightened as the victim of the offence.

The issues for trial

The important issues in the case were:

  • did our client know about the other robbery on the indictment that also involved this victim?
  • had he seen the taser at the point of entry?
  • could the prosecution establish that our client had knowledge of what was to happen before we entered the address?
  • had he participated in the offence at all?

The case involved careful cross examination of a witness who had been subject to two frightening robberies, in particular the second incident that we were charged with.  It was not disputed that either robbery had taken place, just whether our client was involved in any way.

As it was a re-trial, part of the preparation involved listening to the earlier evidence recorded on the court DARTS system.  This would allow cross examination on any inconsistencies between the statements and that evidence, and any evidence given at this trial.

Careful cross examination by solicitor advocate

Through cross examination Lauren was able to confirm that it would not have been inevitable that her client would have seen the taser.  The victim was not sure at which point they had seen the taser.  He also changed his account as to whether our client had left the house or not.  He perhaps struggled, in the end, to point to anything that our client had done or challenge the suggestion that we were scared of what was going on.  There were inconsistencies in his evidence that could not be explained.

A persuasive closing speech

Lauren had to approach her closing speech carefully.  She did not suggest that the victim was lying. Instead, she highlighted that it was likely that the witness believed what he was saying, but was mistaken.  Although he had been a victim of a crime, the nature of the incident meant that he was easily confused about the detail.

The jury was directed towards the burden and standard of proof and how that related to all the evidence that had been heard.  Having heard all of the evidence and the speeches in the case, Lauren’s client was found not guilty.

This was fortunate for her client, as the starting point after trial for an offence of robbery in a dwelling house in circumstances such as these was thirteen years in prison.

Instruct VHS Fletchers in your Crown Court case

We use a combination of in-house solicitor advocates and barristers, as well as specialists from the independent bar, to ensure that you have the representation that you need for your Crown Court case.

We aim to provide continuity of representation with a litigator and advocate assigned to your case at an early stage.

You can read more here about why you might want to consider instructing us as your solicitor.

Follow this link to see how we prepare serious cases of sexual assault for trial at the Crown Court.

You can read some examples of cases successfully defended at trial by our solicitor advocates both here and here.

You can contact us through your nearest office.  Details can be found here.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Contact

News

Admissability of Evidence argument at Chesterfield Magistrates

We have previously written about the increase in prosecutions over recent years where there is no statement from the alleged victim in the case.  The victim might not be supporting the prosecution or may even be unknown.  This will lead to arguments over the admissability of evidence.

The reasoning is that even though a victim is unwilling to assist the Prosecution, a person should not be able to avoid responsibility for offending that they have committed.  Of course, there are a number of risks to proceeding without evidence from the person who ought to know best what, if anything, happened.

Prosecution rely on principle of Res Gestae

In order to present such cases the prosecution will often rely on a rule of evidence called Res Gestae.  This allows hearsay evidence that would usually not be allowed in court to be used as admissable evidence.

You can read more about this rule of evidence here.

Unfortunately we have noted that the prosecution seek to rely on this exception to the usual rules of evidence in a number of cases where it doesn’t apply.

As a result it is vital to have an experienced solicitor who is able to argue your case in Court to try and avoid this from taking place.

Recent case defended by Chesterfield crime solicitor

Chesterfield Crime Solicitor Kevin Tomlinson was recently presented with such a scenario.  His experience told him that the prosecution was trying to admit evidence in circumstances where it was not admissible.

His skill and expertise as an advocate persuaded the Magistrates that he was right.  The evidence was ruled inadmissible and his client was found not guilty.

Domestic violence allegations

Kevin’s client faced charges of common assault and criminal damage within a domestic setting.  Police officers attended the alleged victim who gave an account implicating stating that our client was responsible for the offending.

She alleged that he had been aggressive and threatening towards her when she returned home with a friend after a night out.  After the friend left he had then assaulted her in the bedroom and caused damage to a wall and perfume bottle.

The police had obtained a recording of the 999 call.  The initial complaint had also been recorded on police bodycam footage.  Finally she made a written witness statement.  Here friend had also made a statement describing our client’s behaviour before she left.

During the course of the investigation, the complainant had provided a further statement stating that she no longer supported the prosecution and wished to withdraw her complaint.

From the outset of the case our client had set out a defence.  He told the police that he had not done what was alleged against him and was therefore not guilty of the offences.

Key witness did not attend the trial

In light of the later statement taken from the complainant it was not surprising that the complainant failed to attend Court for the trial. The supporting witness also failed to attend.

Despite this, the prosecutor informed Kevin that they wished to proceed with the case.  They intended to use the account provided by the complainant in the 999 call as well as what she told the police upon their arrival.  The reasoning was that this evidence would be admissable using res gestae.

Kevin argued against the admissability of evidence relating to these allegations.  The key requirement, that the witness was so overcome with circumstances of the situation that she could not have made the allegations up, did not exist in this case. She was calm during both the call and the conversation.  The assertion that the allegation could not have been made up did not stand up to scrutiny.

Additionally, Kevin was able to argue that instead of trying to admit evidence in this way the prosecution, who had known for weeks that the witness did not intend to attend Court, should have taken the appropriate steps to have her there.  The doctrine of Res Gestae should not be used to avoid calling witnesses as it prevents the prosecution challenging the evidence.

Not guilty verdict after trial

Kevin’s argument found favour with the Court who refused the Crown’s application meaning the Prosecution had no option but to offer no evidence against Kevin’s client.

This case highlights the importance of instructing a solicitor.  It is important that you do not rely on a solicitor appointed by the court as their responsibilities to you in your case are limited.

Had the defendant in this case been unrepresented it might be unlikely that they would effectively challenge the admissability of evidence of this nature and the outcome could have been very different.

Instruct an solicitor who is an expert in the admissability of evidence.

Criminal trials will always feature a certain level of complexity.  The best way to prepare for trial is to seek legal advice at the earliest possible moment.

If you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an offence of then make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early advice legal advice can be found here.

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.  Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

A further example of a successful argument against the admissability of evidence can be found here.

We have offices across the East Midlands.  You can find your most convenient office here.   Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

racially aggravated
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands

Contact

News

New report criticises defendants in Magistrates’ Court domestic violence cases

Dame Vera Baird QC, the Police and Crime Commissioner for Northumberland, has once more sought to bring issues of the prosecution of cases of domestic violence to the fore.

She has commissioned and published a report in which she denounces defendants who plead not guilty in cases alleging charges of domestic violence as ‘gaming the system’ in order to have cases dropped.

Magistrates refusal to grant CPS adjournment

The report maintains that defendants are using the period between plea and trial to intimidate partners into failing to attend court.  Once a witness doesn’t attend, it is claimed that the courts are all too quick to refuse adjournment requests, leaving the prosecution with no alternative but to offer no evidence, resulting in a not guilty verdict.

In 13 cases out 32 observed at one court centre, Magistrates refused an adjournment when the complainant failed to attend.  As a result, the cases were dismissed despite arguments to the contrary from the CPS.

Late change of plea

In 21 cases at one court centre, defendants entered a not-guilty plea and asked for a trial. On the various dates fixed, the observers noticed, 12 of them pleaded guilty as soon as the victim turned up and before they had given any evidence.

Criticism of defence practitioners

Defence solicitors also attract criticism.  Following a guilty plea or verdict, it is believed that they offer ‘irrelevant’ mitigation based on their client’s drunken state.

Of course, these complaints fail to acknowledge two important matters:

  • being drunk is an aggravating feature in sentencing guidelines rather than mitigation
  • whether a defendant was drunk may, however, allow the court to treat an isolated incident as being our of character

What is the real complaint?

In reality, the complaints within the report seem to relate to the following:

  • the failure to give proper training to Magistrates
  • a failure to properly fund support staff
  • under use by police and CPS of the charge of coercive or controlling behaviour
  • insufficient support of the complainant to ensure they attend to give evidence
  • failure by police or CPS to present full information in support of applications for restraining orders
  • evidential failings that impacted on the court process
  • courts not ordering Newton Hearing to decide a factual basis for sentence where certain parts of an incident are denied

All of these are capable of change subject to the necessary resources being provided.  The defence cannot be said to be responsible for any of them.  At first glance the analysis of the limited number of cases in the study does not acknowledge the legal considerations and framework that would apply in many of the cases.

Conclusions

The report is based on a limited number of cases in a single geographical region so the conclusions that could or should be drawn are perhaps limited.

While defendants can be confident that they may gain an advantage in pleading not guilty and having the matter listed for trial they will continue to do so.  Further, it is their right to test the evidence at trial.

The labelling of the entering of a not guilty plea as ‘gaming the system’ is unhelpful.  Some defendants will do so hoping to gain the advantage of a witness not attending, others (perhaps the majority) will plead not guilty because they have a defence to the charges brought.

We regularly provide advice and representation at contested domestic violence trials.  An example of such a trial can be found here.

Those defendants who in the end plead guilty will lose credit for a plea that could have been entered earlier and will find it extremely hard to argue that any genuine regret or remorse exists.  Sentencing for domestic violence allegations are governed by a specific guideline.

The police and the prosecution have the evidential tools at their disposal to build many cases without the need for a complainant to attend.  Some considerations relating to such cases can be found here.

The full report can be found here.

Instruct an expert in defending domestic violence allegations

Allegations of domestic violence are treated seriously by the courts.  They also need handling with sensitivity.  The law can be complex, particularly where the prosecution do not seek to rely on the complainant’s evidence.

As a result, if you are arrested or know that the police wish to speak to you about an offence of domestic violence make sure you insist on your right to free and independent legal advice.

The advantages of such early advice legal advice can be found here.

If you have already been interviewed or face court proceedings we can still make a real difference to the outcome of your case.  Legal aid may well be available to fund your defence at court.

We have offices across the East Midlands.  You can find your most convenient office here.   Alternatively you can contact us using the form below.

defending domestic violence cases

News

The no comment interview – your right to silence

There is no magic to the phrase no comment.  It is simply a device for a suspect to indicate that they have no intention of answering police questions.  It allows the police to put questions and the interview to progress easily.  An alternative would be to stay mute for the duration of the interview, but that would only prolong matters!

Advice on your decision to answer no comment

The decision whether to answer police questions or make no comment replies in police interview can be a difficult one.  There are many different considerations to balance.  Since the changes brought in by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 many more suspects are advised to answer police questions than previously.

This Act allows Magistrates’ or a jury to draw conclusions from a no comment interview in certain circumstances.  There are four conditions, including whether an accused failed to mention a fact later relied on in their defence and whether it was reasonable at the time for the accused to have mentioned this fact in interview or on charge.

Our advice is subject to legal privilege and cannot be disclosed

There is still, however, a place for the no comment interview but you are best advised to seek free and independent legal advice from a specialist solicitor or accredited police station representative before making the decision not to answer questions in police interview.  As we are entirely independent of the police any advice suggesting that you reply no comment to police questions will be in your best interests.

Any advice that we give to you and your instructions that allow us to give that advice are confidential and subject to legal privilege.  We can only disclose your instructions and our legal advice with your permission.

Your police station representative will always make a note of the instructions that you give, so even if you make ‘no comment’ replies they can give evidence to the court if necessary to show that you haven’t made up a defence once you are charged and papers are served.

Our advice will always be tailored to the circumstances of your case

 Our police station advisers know that each case will turn on its own facts.  Our advice will balance any risks and benefits to you of a no comment interview.  You will be fully advised of the advantages and disadvantages of such a course of action to allow you to make a final decision.

Opportunity for a confidential consultation about the evidence

Before providing advice allowing you to make that decision your legal representative will always seek a confidential discussion with you about the evidence. That will allow them to take your instructions in private and give you advice.  It could be that the police choose not to provide the private facilities necessary.  That in itself could mean that a full discussion of the allegations is not possible and a no comment interview would be advised.

Your police station solicitor will be alive to factors that might affect whether you should answer questions – these could include youth, mental vulnerability, a hearing or speaking disability, poor command of language, a severe nervous state or other condition.

What if I am guilty of the allegation?

 It may be that although you are guilty of the offence the police may not have enough evidence to put before a court to convict you without your admission. There might be concerns about the level of disclosure of evidence from the police which could suggest that the evidence to convict you simply isn’t there. As a suspect is ‘innocent until proven guilty’ you are perfectly within your rights to choose not to answer questions.

Alternatively, it might be that the police do not know the full extent of your offending and answering questions would make matters far worse for you.  Again, this would be a valid reason for replying no comment to police questions in interview.

As the caution only talks about inferences rather than any benefit of an early admission, the Court of Appeal has stated that you cannot lose discount for early guilty plea on the basis of a no comment interview.

Our free and independent legal advice will balance these considerations against other concerns that you might have.

If you admit the offences in police interview then you will have the benefit of demonstrating remorse for your offending.  True remorse can significantly reduce any sentence that you receive.  The greatest demonstration of remorse might be the strongest evidence it is genuine.

Alternatively, an early admission might mean that a prosecution can be avoided and you can be diverted from the court system.  To receive a caution or a restorative justice disposal an admission will normally be required from you.

What if I have a defence to the charge?  Shouldn’t I tell the police?

There may be a number of reasons why you would choose not to answer questions if you are innocent of the charge.  For example

  • You may know who the true culprit is but not want to name them
  • Your defence might involve admissions to some other damaging or embarrassing conduct but that is not illegal
  • We are unable to fully advise you as the police have not given us enough information about your case
  • The case is too complex or old to provide an immediate response

Other factors that might be relevant could include:

  • Your state of mind at the time of interview. Perhaps you were suggestible or in a state of shock?
  • You might be easily confused and liable to make mistakes in your account
  • There is a need to refer to information that isn’t to hand in police interview to check an alibi
  • We identify that there is some other good reason why you might not come over well in police interview

Our specialist police station advice will include whether there is a good reason for making no comment in interview, including whether a prepared statement should be used instead to control the manner in which the police are told about your defence.

We will advise you as to whether there are likely to be issues of admissibility at court relating to such matters as comment that you have made to the police upon arrest or any informal identification that might mean you should exercise your right to silence.

Always seek our free and independent legal advice in police interview

As you can see there are many factors that affect a decision whether to answer questions in police interview or answer no comment to any questions put.  It is vital that you seek our advice which is free of charge before you commit to a decision that could provide the evidence to secure a conviction or lead to problems in any future court case.

A number of other benefits to seeking legal advice can be found here.

We provide nationwide advice and assistance in the police station from our offices across the East Midlands.  You can find your nearest office here.  Our expert representation is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

no comment
VHS Fletchers offices across the East Midlands

Alternatively you can use the contact form below:

Contact

News

Consent and Sexual Offences

It would be thought that in relation to sexual offences and the issue of consent the issue should be straight forward – yes or no?

As always, life and the law are more complicated than that.  The issue of consent is, unfortunately, not so simple.

What is consent?

 A person consents if she or he agrees by choice and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice.

 

Can a drunk person give consent?

Yes, drunken consent is still consent.  However, this is where problems can arise. If a person loses their capacity to choose through drink then he or she is not consenting.

Where a person is consenting is frequently the issue in many rape cases.  As a result it is often one word against another.

The Courts have given the following guidance as to the issues to focus upon:

  1. Did sexual intercourse take place?
  2. Did the complainant consent to sexual intercourse?
  3. Did the complainant have the freedom and capacity to consent?
  4. Did the defendant reasonably believe that the complainant was consenting? This consideration will not apply in all cases.

Who decides?

 At trial, it will be for the jury to determine issues of capacity and consent having heard all of the evidence.

How do you prove consent?

In the absence of something in writing, and even then, there could be doubts  A jury will have to decide the issue having heard all of the evidence.

In some cases, it is not enough for a defendant to simply say that he or she believed the other person was consenting.  There must be evidence that he or she had a reasonable belief that there was consent. This would include considering any steps taken by the defendant to ascertain the complainant was consenting.

The situation could also arise where consent is given on condition, for example, that a condom is used. If one is not used, then the “consent” may no longer provide a defence.

There have also been cases where a female has pretended to be a male and had intercourse on that basis. The defendant was guilty because the complainant said that she would not have consented if she had known that the defendant was female.

How can we help?

This article is a brief analysis of potential issues, as you can see this is an area that would require careful assessment and expert advice.

The problem with many alleged sexual offences is that they require a jury to examine intimate factual scenarios, often clouded by drink or drugs, where there is seldom any independent evidence to assist one way or the other.

 

It is our job to present the strongest case possible.  You can read more about how we will prepare your case fro trial here.

To ensure that your defence is properly advanced from the start, you will want to take advantage of our free and independent legal advice in the police station.  The advice is free to you no matter what your income.  You can read about the advantages of early advice here.

Sexual offences are likely to be heard before the Crown Court.  We will always advise you as to your entitlement to legal aid to ensure affordable representation at trial.  You can read more about Crown Court legal aid here.

We provide nationwide representation from our offices across the East Midlands.  You can find your nearest office here.  Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Contact

consent sexual offences

News

Successful week at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court for Denney Lau

Clients of Chesterfield crime solicitor Denney Lau have had a successful week before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court.

Successful exceptional hardship argument

Denney’s client was guilty of failing to notify the details of a driver when required to do so by the police.  Unfortunately he already had ten penalty points on his driving licence.  As a result, the minimum of six penalty points that would be imposed for the new offence would make him liable for a disqualification for a minimum of six months under the totting up procedure.

To avoid this, Denney successfully argued before the Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court that his client would suffer exceptional hardship if he was to be disqualified.  Although any disqualification is likely to lead to hardship, in this case our client would not only lose his employment as a driver but also his home.  He would be unable to continue with the additional responsibilities that he had for his grandchildren.

Our client was relived that he was able to keep his driving licence although it now had sixteen penalty points upon it.

Not guilty of driving whilst disqualified

Two days later, Denney represented another client who was standing trial at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court in relation to an allegation of driving whilst disqualified.

A police officer had intelligence suggesting that our client had been using a particular vehicle whilst disqualified and therefore without insurance.  The police saw the vehicle.  There was a pursuit and when the vehicle came to a halt three people ran away from the vehicle.

The officer claimed that he was sure that the driver of the vehicle was Denney’s client.  This was disputed at trial.

Challenging police evidence can often be difficult.  It is the case that Magistrates are often more persuaded by the evidence of an officer than by that of a defendant.  Denney conducted his own research into the credibility of the officer in question.  He found that the officer had appeared before the police disciplinary panel for misconduct recently.  That misconduct was that he had deliberately made a wrong entry onto the Police National Computer.  As a result the officer had received a warning about his conduct.

In order to have this information before the court, Denney had to make a successful bad character application.  Aside from cross-examining the officer about the disciplinary finding, Denney also asked him detailed questions about the difficult circumstances of the identification.

After considering the evidence in the case the magistrates found our client not guilty of the offences.

Denied shop theft allegation

Four days after that a different client stood trial at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court in relation to an allegation of shop theft.  In this case a store manager claimed that he had witnessed a theft, identified our client from CCTV and then given chase before our client left the scene in a vehicle.

Our client had, unfortunately, chosen not to take advantage of our free and independent advice in police interview.  He had, however, stated that he did not recall being involved in such an incident.

In preparation for what could be a difficult trial Denney closely examined the CCTV footage.  He discovered that the offender’s face could not be seen.  As a result, this cast doubt on the identification made by the store manager.

In his closing speech, Denney argued that the Magistrates needed to examine closely the circumstances in which the identification was made.   Mistakes can be made in recognition of close relatives and friends can sometimes made be made.

Again, having heard Denney’s argument and considered the evidence the court found his client not guilty.

Seek our representation before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court

chesterfield magistrates' court
Chesterfield crime solicitor Denney Lau

You can ensure that you are represented by Chesterfield crime solicitor Denney Lau by phoning 01246 387999 and making an appointment to see him.  Contact him in advance of any police interview or court appearance and if he is available then he will be with you, or make arrangements for one of his experienced colleagues to attend instead.

Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

Contact

News

Should you consider instructing a QC?

We are often asked questions about Queen’s Counsel, or QC’s.  This is most probably because the image of leading barristers has been epitomised over the years in leading television dramas such as Silk and Kavanagh QC.  As a result it is not surprising that many initially wish to investigate the possibility of instructing a QC to defend their case.

So, first, what is a Queen’s Counsel or QC?

A QC, to put it somewhat grandly, is ‘one of Her Majesty’s Counsel, learned in the law.’

The first thing to know is that there is no actual connection to Her Majesty.  Queen’s Counsel, while appointed with the final authority of the Queen, are in fact selected by an independent appointments commission.

In practical terms, QCs are barristers or solicitors who have been able to evidence the highest courtroom skills.  It is an award for excellence in advocacy.

While the figures vary year on year, about 10% of the bar (the barristers’ profession) are Queen’s Counsel, so it is a pretty select group. There are very few solicitor QCs.  The ability of solicitors to apply was only extended to them quite recently and the number of solicitors who specialise in advocacy is relatively low.

There are also honorary Queen’s Counsel who in most instances do not practice at all (such as legal academics), or if they do are not allowed to use the title for that purpose.

Do I need a QC?

There are some things to consider before instructing a QC. The first is that the QC may not be the best person for the job.  For example, in many cases, before the magistrates’ court, it is often better to instruct a highly experienced local solicitor who knows the court and this type of court procedure.

It may be that a Queen’s Counsel who is accustomed to defending fraud cases at the Old Bailey may be quite useless appearing on a drink-driving accusation at Mansfield Magistrates’ Court.

Generally speaking, in a perfect world, it makes sense to have the best available advocate, if you can. The ‘best’ may not always mean a Queen’s Counsel though.

If the case is not the most complex, it may well be that a highly experienced junior advocate can more than adequately deal with it. There are also some specialist areas where a junior advocate may be more experienced.  This is seen most often in regulatory work, for example.

It is also essential that the advocate works seamlessly as a team with your Crown Court litigator to ensure the best case preparation possible.  This is something that we value particularly highly as it can significantly affect the overall outcome of your case.

Where liberty is at risk, it is, however, understandable that some people will wish to leave nothing to chance.  They might  feel a particular level of comfort in instructing a QC.

So, for most people, the issue is not ‘should I?’, it becomes one of ‘can I?’.

Instructing a QC in privately funded cases?

If you are funding your own defence costs, the crucial question is whether you can afford to engage in instructing a QC. In some instances, it may be possible to instruct a QC alone to defend.  In other cases, Queen’s Counsel and a junior advocate will be needed.  Ironically this might be more cost-effective.

It is impossible in this article to give indicative costs.  These will vary greatly depending on

  • the type of case
  • the volume of papers
  • whether it is a guilty plea or contested trial
  • if a trial, the likely length.

In all but the most straightforward guilty plea cases the cost of instructing a QC can easily reach into the tens of thousands.  As a result, for all but the very wealthy, there will need to be a considered decision.  It is not one that should not be made lightly.  We will, of course, carefully navigate you through all of the available options and provide you with the necessary advice.

Can I instruct a QC in a legally aided case?

If your case is legally aided, then it is very unlikely that we can instruct a QC unless the case is one of particular gravity or the utmost complexity.

Most people would assume, for example, that instructing a QC would be permitted in all murder cases.  Surprisingly that is not the case. If the option of Queen’s Counsel is available, we will make the application for you and advise of the outcome.

Many people ask whether they or someone on their behalf can pay privately for a QC while receiving legal aid funding for the other elements of the case. If that is something that you wish to discuss, then please speak to us at the earliest opportunity.

In conclusion, there are many cases where instructing a QC is desirable if it can be achieved.  However, the vast majority of cases will nor merit a QC, and you can be assured that we will ensure that your representation will be designed to bring about the best possible outcome.  This might be through a Solicitor Advocate employed by this firm or through the use of independent counsel.

As a firm, we are immensely proud of the strong working relationship that we have with all of the advocates we regularly instruct. It is probably this close relationship more than anything else which affects case outcomes, so even if you cannot secure a QC to represent you, you should not feel that you are not getting the very best service.

How we can assist

To discuss any aspect of a case before the Crown Court then please contact your nearest office.  We will advise you about representation.  This will include the pros and cons of proceeding privately.

For example, there is likely to be a bar on claiming back the costs of your defence if you would have been entitled to legal aid but chose not to take advantage of the scheme.

The details can be found here.

instructing a QC

Alternatively you can use the contact from below:

Contact

News

Police evidence of disorderly conduct rejected leading to not guilty verdict

disorderly conduct
Newark criminal advocate Nikki Carlisle

Newark criminal advocate Nikki Carlisle was instructed to defend an allegation of disorderly conduct before Nottingham Magistrates’ Court.  The trial was listed before a district judge.

Police officers change evidence in disorderly conduct trial

Two police officers gave evidence on behalf of the prosecution.  In their original witness statements they had both described Niki’s client as shouting and swearing in the street.  They described a number of other members of the public being present.  Their view was that his behaviour would have upset these people.  The officers went further to state that they were also distressed by the behaviour because he had been verbally abusive to them.

In a somewhat curious development, when the first officer came to give evidence he was unable to remember anything said or done by Nikki’s client.  This surprising turn put Nikki’s client in a much better position.

disorderly conduct

The second police officer, however, departed from his statement by saying that the behaviour was far worse than originally described.  He stated that our client had been aggressive and that he had been subject to “the worst verbal abuse that he had ever received in his life”.

The officer went on to give examples of the kind of the things our client had said to him.  Nikki was able to play the bodycam footage that had been provided to us during disclosure.  This showed that the defendant was not saying any of the things the officer had spoken of in evidence.

Bodycam footage undermines police evidence

Instead, it showed the second officer being sarcastic towards our client, goading him and then using what was clearly excessive force to arrest him.  This included spraying him in the face with CS gas.

Despite this clear evidence, the officer tried to explain the difficulties away.  He maintained that the abuse must simply not have been picked up by the body worn camera microphone.  He claimed that our client had been resisting arrest and that he was in fear of violence.

Nikki addressed the District Judge in relation to two substantial points:

  • whatever the Judge made of the alleged conduct, he should not infer that members of the public would have felt harassed, alarmed or distressed without evidence of that
  • the only person claiming to have been so affected by the behaviour was the second officer who could not be called a truthful witness.

The District Judge found our client not guilty of disorderly conduct.  The judge went as far as to comment on the unnecessary use of CS gas in this case.  Our client is pursuing a police complaint.

disorderly conduct

Why instruct an criminal defence solicitor?

This case demonstrates a number of reasons why you ought to instruct a solicitor to defend criminal proceedings on your behalf.  Although this was a minor matter when compared to many other offences, it was of great importance to our client.

disorderly conductDespite the nature of the offence we were successful in applying for legal aid funding to ensure his free representation in the Magistrates’ Court.  You can read more about legal aid here.

We were able to ensure that all relevant evidence was disclosed, including the important body worn camera footage.  Some recently publicised problems with disclosure can be found here.

Finally, we will ask questions on your behalf and make arguments based on the law and the facts to the courts.

Whether your case involves disorderly The reasons why you might want to think about instructing us in your criminal case can be found here.

Contact us

We represent clients across the country from our offices in the East Midlands.  You can find the details of your nearest office here.  Alternatively you can use the contact form below.

disorderly conduct

Contact