Tag Archives: trial

News

Police Identification Challenged in Excess Alcohol Trial

Nottingham crime solicitor Alex Chapman secured an acquittal for a client facing a charge of driving with excess alcohol.  The trial was heard before Nottingham Magistrates’ Court.

The issue at trial was the correctness of the identification.  A police officer out on patrol saw a vehicle driving with a faulty brake light so the officer drove alongside the vehicle and spoke to the driver.

In response, the driver then drove away around a corner at speed.  This aroused the police officer’s suspicions so he followed the vehicle. By the time he caught up with the vehicle a few seconds later, the vehicle was stationary. There was now nobody in the driver’s seat.

Defending a charge of excess alcohol

One male was stood outside the vehicle.  Two males were sat on the backseat. The police officer believed that he immediately recognised our client, one of the back seat passengers, as the driver of the vehicle. Because of this he asked him to provide a roadside breath test, which he failed.  As a result he was arrested for driving with excess alcohol.

Alex’s client, a Polish national, insisted throughout that the officer had made a mistake.  He claimed that one of the other males had been the driver.

The only issue in the case was the correctness of the identification.  In order to convict the Magistrates would have to be sure that the officer had not made a mistake.  If there was a reasonable doubt as to that, then Alex’s client would be found not guilty.

As a result, Alex directed all of his cross examination to showing that the necessary doubt was present.  The officer admitted that he had spoken to the driver for less than three seconds. He accepted that it was dark at the time.  Although there was street lighting, the driver was sat inside car.  The interior light was not on so the inside of the car was in darkness.

Can you be ‘1 million per cent’ sure?

Alex showed the officer a photograph of his client’s friend.  He had been the other male sat in the backseat at the time of the arrest. The photograph was taken on the night in question. The officer conceded that they looked very similar. He could not be moved, however, on the correctness of the identification.  He continued to maintain that he was “one million percent sure” that Alex’s client had been the driver.

Our client gave evidence along with his friend.  His friend’s evidence was that he had been the driver. He stated that he had been taking the car for a test drive and panicked when he saw the police because he did not have insurance. He acknowledged that he knew he was admitting an offence himself but told the court he could not let his friend be wrongly convicted.

The third male who had been outside the car was the owner of the vehicle. He also attended to give evidence and support our client’s case.

Turnbull Guidelines and Identification

The quality of identification as well as the weight to be placed upon it is governed by the case of R -v- Turnbull.  Alex directed his closing speech to the Magistrates to dealing with these issues.  Although the officer himself was sure of the correctness of his identification, a convincing witness can still be mistaken.  Alex argued that in all of the circumstances the officer could have made a mistake.

This argument was supported by his client’s full cooperation and consistent denials of responsibility.  His account was also corroborated by two other witnesses.

The Magistrates found that despite the police officer’s confidence, they could not be sure of the correctness of the identification.  Alex’s client was found not guilty of excess alcohol.  Because of this he was not subject to the driving disqualification that would have followed a conviction.

Legal aid available

Despite being in work, Alex’s client was able to receive legal aid to ensure his free representation before the Magistrates’ Court.  This was particularly important in his case as he required the assistance of an interpreter.  Had there not been legal aid, he would have had to fund not only the case but interpreter’s fees himself when he gave instructions.

We will always investigate your entitlement to legal aid so that you receive affordable advice.

Contact a Nottingham criminal defence solicitor

If you are under investigation by the police or face court proceedings you will want to instruct an expert.  Call our Nottingham office on 0115 9599550 or contact us using the form below.

If one of our other offices is more convenient then you can find our contact details here.

Contact

News

Bad Character Evidence Ignored by Mansfield Magistrates

bad character evidence mansfield crime solicitor
Mansfield criminal solicitor Tim Haines

Mansfield crime solicitor Tim Haines secured another not guilty verdict for a client before Mansfield Magistrates’ Court despite agreed bad character evidence.

His client faced an allegation of going equipped to steal.  He was stopped by the police walking home with a bag of tools.  He was also in possession of a mini motor bike that did not work.

The police chose to arrest him. A radio check on our client’s record revealed convictions for dishonesty and going equipped offences.

Tim’s client had a defence that he was advised to provide in interview.  He maintained that he had put his offending behind him. Instead he had been at a friend’s house trying to mend the mini motorbike.  He was on his way home when stopped by the police.

The police office went to the trouble of producing a map of the route taken.  This was intended to show that our client was not taking direct route. A statement had also been taken from a witness purporting to be an expert.  The statement contained details of what crimes the tools could have been used for.

A clear trial strategy

Tim used his substantial experience as a trial advocate to decide a trial strategy.  He was able to agree the prosecution evidence but comments that were simply opinion were removed by agreement. As a result, the Magistrates’ did not have the opportunity to hear ‘live’ evidence from a police officer.

Bad character evidence neutralised

The prosecution had also served an application to have bad character evidence before the Magistrates.  Again, Tim’s experience meant that he accepted that there was no realistic challenge to this application.  Instead, he planned how his client’s record could be used to his advantage.

Tim’s analysis of the record meant that he could point out to the Magistrates that his client had always pleaded guilty to crimes he had committed.   He took any potential sting out of the prosecution cross examination of his client by having his client give evidence about his character at the outset.  His client was then able to explain his past.

Strong closing speech

Tim was able to make a strong closing speech on behalf of his client because of his clear trial strategy.  The Magistrates, in their reasons for find Tim’s client not guilty, mentioned that they had not relied upon the bad character evidence.

Tim’s client was naturally delighted by the outcome in the case.

Contact a Mansfield Criminal Defence Solicitor

Whether you face investigation by the police, or court proceedings, then you will want to instruct Tim Haines.  He can be contacted on 01623 675816.  Alternatively you can used the contact form below.

Contact

News

Not guilty verdict in road rage trial at Nottingham

Nottingham crime solicitor Alex Chapman represented a client at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court. The allegations arose out of an alleged road rage incident.

The case proceeded to trial and after witnesses had been called Alex addressed the Magistrates on the evidence.  Our client was found not guilty.

The Allegation

It was said to be a road rage incident.  The complainant and Alex’s client were said to have pulled over in their vehicles.  They then got out of their cars and confronted one another.

The complainant told the Court that our client punched him twice without provocation. Alex’s client denied punching the complainant in his police interview.  Instead he said that he did have to push him backwards to defend himself.  This was only after the complainant had tried to punch him first.

Command of the evidence allowed focused questions

Alex’s command of the evidence allowed him to cross-examined the complainant in detail.  In particular he asked him about several comments he had made to the police in his statement.  He had not repeated them in court.

For example, he had stated that when he got out of his car his ‘blood was up’.  He accepted that he had been swearing at our client.  The complainant also said that he practised mixed-martial-arts.  A belief had been expressed that he could have ‘wiped the floor’ with our client if he had wanted.

These comments were capable of raising a doubt as to who was the aggressor.  The Magistrates might be suspicious of the complainant’s motives for withholding this information.

The complainant’s wife gave evidence as well.  Under careful cross examination Alex brought out a number of discrepancies.  The effect of this was to cast substantial doubt over the Prosecution case.

Our clients was a victim of road rage

Alex’s client gave evidence. He explained that his wife, mother-in-law and two young children were present at the scene. The Court was told Court that the Complainant had been acting extremely aggressively.  The complainant swung a punch at him first so he had little choice but to push him away.

Our client’s wife also attended to give evidence,  Although extremely nervous, she gave an account entirely consistent with that of her husband.

Burden and standard of proof

In order to convict our client the Magistrates’ had to be sure of his guilt.  He did not have to prove anything.  Alex addressed the Magistrates in his closing speech.  Discrepancies in the Prosecution case were highlighted to the Court.  Alex reminded the bench of the level of aggression expressed by the complainant in his original police statement.

It appeared that the complainant had been unable to contain his own bravado when he had spoken to the police officer.  This revealed the truth of the incident.

In the circumstances Alex’s client had little reason to have punched the complainant without provocation as described.

On considering all of the evidence the Magistrates decided that Alex’s client was not guilty.

Free legal aid funding

Alex’s client was financially eligible for legal aid to ensure his free representation before the Magistrates’ Court.

Contact a Nottingham criminal defence lawyer

If you are under investigation by the police or face court proceedings then you will want to seek expert advice and representation in your case.

The trial here was at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court.  Alex’s client lived in the Chesterfield area. Alex was able to see him at our Chesterfield office to prepare his case.  This prevented a lengthy, expensive and inconvenient journey for him and his family.  We will always seek to prepare your case in the most convenient manner for you.

If you wish to speak to one of our lawyers then please contact your nearest office.  Details are here.

Alternatively you can use the following contact form:

Contact

News

Racially Aggravated Assault – not guilty verdict after two day trial

racially aggravated assault trial solicitor Nick Wright
Derby criminal defence solicitor Nick Wright

Derby criminal solicitor Nick Wright recently dealt with a client before Derby Magistrates’ Court.  She faced an allegation of racially aggravated assault. Following a two day trial she was found not guilty.

Nick initially dealt with his client as duty solicitor.  Having met him, he applied for legal aid and she chose to continue to instruct him at trial.

A strong prosecution case

The prosecution case was apparently strong .  Four prosecution witnesses were called, each of them maintaining that Nick’s client was guilty of the offence.

All of the witnesses said that Nick’s client grabbed the complainant’s clothing, punched him and made reference to his nationality.  A claim was made that he’d been bullying our client’s daughter.

Racially aggravated assault allegation fabricated

Our client claimed that the allegation of assault was made up. The complainant had been bullying the son, and this allegation was part of that.  No racist language was used.

Fortunately, Nick was able to call his client’s teenage son and another person present to back up this account.  Owing to the son’s age, Nick successfully applied for Special Measures so that he could give evidence from behind a screen.

Although she provided helpful information, the other witness was reluctant to attend.  As it was crucial that all relevant and helpful evidence be before the court, Nick applied for a witness summons that compelled the witness to attend court.

Such active preparation by your criminal defence lawyer is crucial if you wish your best case to be before the Magistrates.

Contact a Derby Criminal Solicitor

If you are being investigated by the police or face court proceedings then please contact Derby criminal defence lawyer Nick Wright on 01332 546818 or email him here.  If you face proceedings elsewhere then you can find your local office here.

News

Common assault trial – not guilty verdict

Nottingham criminal solicitor Derek Brown recently represented a client charged with common assault.  In an unusual case, the alleged victim of the assault had not provided a statement.  The evidence upon which any conviction would turn was from an independent eye witness.

This witness claimed that she had seen Derek’s client slap his partner with such force that she was knocked to the ground.

Denied common assault allegation

He accepted the following:

  • that he had been the man that the witness had seen
  • that he had been arguing with his partner in the street
  • that his partner had ended up on the floor but he had fallen with her

Derek’s client had explained his version of events in police interview.  He had explained that the argument had begun at his partner’s address.  He did not wish to continue the argument so chose to leave.  His partner tried to stop him so the argument continued in the street.

His partner continued to try and get him to return to her address.  She grabbed him, and he, in turn, grabbed her.  There was shouting throughout.  During this scuffle. Derek’s client maintained that they fell on the floor but he denied that he slapped his partner as described by the witness.

After the incident, Derek’s client maintained that he helped his partner up and they parted ways, going to their separate addresses.

Cross-examination of a mistaken witness

Derek’s client denied the allegation.  The case was listed for trial.  Both the eye-witness and our client gave evidence.  Derek’s questioning was directed at showing the Magistrates that the view of the eye-witness may well have been impeded taking into account all of the circumstances.  The witness did not know either party so would have had no reason to lie.  She was simply mistaken.

In the end, following Derek’s speech, the Magistrates’ were not sure that his client had hit his partner.  As a result he was found not guilty.

Contact a Criminal Solicitor in Nottingham

Every contested case will require a criminal defence lawyer who can identify a trial strategy.  Derek Brown is an experienced Magistrates’ Court trial advocate so will help identify relevant issues in your case.  If you are under investigation by the police or face court proceedings for common assault or any other matter please contact him on 0115 9599550 or by email here.

News

Pre-emptive strike defence succeeds at trial

pre-emptive strike self defence trial
Nottingham crime solicitor Derek Brown

Nottingham crime solicitor Derek Brown used persuasive advocacy to ensure that his client was found not guilty of assault on the basis of a reasonable pre-emptive strike.

Derek’s client was of good character.  The background to the case was that the complainant had been seeing our client’s boyfriend. This news came out of the blue, understandably causing Derek’s client upset.

Unfortunately, the complainant chose to try and make matters even more upsetting.  She parked outside our client’s house the night before the allegation was made, laughing and using behaviour calculated to provoke a response.

The very next day the complainant was parked up again.  She made an allegation that Derek’s client had approached her in her vehicle, reached through the window and punched her and pulled her hair.  The incident was said to have been unprovoked.  Later in the same day, our client was said to have approached the vehicle again and hit it.

Police Interview as a Volunteer

Our client had been interviewed by the police as a volunteer.  This means that she was not under arrest.  Her answers to questions were still tape-recorded however, and would have the same value as evidence in court even though she was not arrested.

She had chosen not to have a solicitor present in interview.  This might be an unfortunate effect of calling a suspect a volunteer – it perhaps creates an impression that the investigation or interview is somehow less important than when arrested.  Legal advice and representation remains free under legal aid.

Denied assault allegation

In interview, she explained that she had seen the complainant parked up and asked her what she was ‘playing at’.  At that time, the car window was fully wound up.  The complainant stated that she had done nothing wrong, but then suddenly opened the car door and took off her seat belt.

The complainant started to move to get out of the car.  Derek’s client maintained that her body language was aggressive.  She believed she was going to be attacked so before she could get out of her seat she punched her once to the face.  She did this because she believed she was going to be subject to an imminent attack.

Not guilty due to reasonable pre-emptive strike

At trial, both the complainant and Derek’s client gave evidence.  Derek recognised that potential weaknesses in his client’s case of a reasonable pre-emptive strike were:

  • the motive that she had for assaulting the complainant
  • the complainant was hit while still in the car

Despite the problems, Derek’s client gave evidence well.  Derek’s experience meant that he was able to address the Magistrates’ in a strong closing speech.  The Magistrates’ went on to find his client not guilty.

Contact a Nottingham Criminal Defence Lawyer

If you have a difficult case that may turn on whether you instruct an experienced lawyer, then please contact Derek on 0115 9599550 or email him here.

News

Police assault client not guilty when mobile phone footage recovered

police assault trial nottingham criminal solicitor
Nottingham crime solicitor Graham Heathcote

Notttingham crime solicitor Graham Heathcote recently represented two clients from the Nottingham Polish community who were charged with similar allegations of disorderly conduct, and one with two allegations of police assault.

Although both were convicted of the public order offence, there were not guilty verdicts for the police assault allegations.

Neither client had been in trouble with the police before.  They decided, along with others, to stage an impromptu, unlicensed, boxing match in the street in the Forest Fields area of Nottingham.  Unfortunately it all gets out of hand to the extent that a member of the public calls the police.

Three police cars attended the incident.  One of the group, represented by another firm of solicitors, was arrested.  The police wanted to arrest Graham’s client.  The decision to arrest was based on the description of one of those involved.  This was given by the eye-witness who called the police.

The police witnesses alleged that Graham’s client backed off and  gestured as if he wanted to fight the police.  It was then alleged that our client grabbed a female officer in a headlock, taking her to the ground.  On the way to the floor it was claimed that he kicked a second officer.

The third Polish male was arrested for the public order offence based on the witness account, and he was initially represented by Nick Walsh of VHS Fletchers.

Graham’s client pleaded not guilty to all of his charges.  Nick’s client pleaded not guilty to the public order offence.  Unfortunately, legal aid was refused for Nick’s client despite his good character and the challenge to police evidence.  This is because the charge did not carry a prison sentence.

Legal aid was also initially refused for Graham’s client on the basis of his financial means.  Graham pursued a hardship application with the Legal Aid Agency and legal aid was eventually granted to ensure his free representation before the court.

Pro Bono Representation

Unfortunately, the hardship application was not decided until two days before the trial.  As a result, little time was left for preparation.  Graham felt able, however, to represent the second client without legal aid on a pro-bono, or free, basis to ensure that he had a fair trial.  As a result, this client did not have to pay for his representation.

 Decisive evidence from cameras

CCTV footage was obtained from the street.  Unfortunately the incident was in the distance.  It was grainy and not helped by poor lighting.  It did not appear to show a great deal of the incident.

Graham took the time to slow the footage down and was able to blow up the footage.  If watched frame by frame the camera captured the police jumping on Graham’s client.  They then took him to the floor before the incident disappeared from view behind a police car.

This footage alone cast doubt on the truth of the police allegation that Graham’s client was the aggressor and put an officer in a headlock.  He would also have seemed to be too far away from other officers to kick any of them.

Graham’s second client had continued to film the incident on his mobile phone once it had gone out of view of the street CCTV.  Although the police denied it, one of them was seen on the CCTV taking our client’s phone off him and then returning it.  Our client maintained the officer deleted the footage.

Graphic footage retrieved from mobile phone

police assault not guilty nottingham defence lawyer
Nottingham Magistrates’ Court

The footage was able to be retrieved from the phone despite the police attempts to delete it.  It showed the confiscating officer slamming our client’s head on the pavement.  The footage was so graphic that the court usher was heard to gasp when it was played.

Of course, in part the prosecution case was dependent upon the truthfulness of this officer.  This was the same officer who denied the confiscation of the phone and assaulting the client.  This evidence was proved to be untrue.

The only type of camera footage missing was police BodyCam footage.  Although six police officers in total attended and body cameras are now issued as standard to all front line officers apparently not a single officer was wearing one.

Not guilty of police assault

Although both clients were convicted of the disorderly conduct mater relating to their earlier behaviour, the client charged with police assault was found not guilty of both offences.

Contact a criminal solicitor in Nottingham

With the right representation (in this case free for one client) and preparation (even at short notice) police evidence can be successfully challenged.  Here, if convicted, one of our clients was likely to be receive a prison sentence.

Choosing the right criminal lawyer who will properly prepare and present your can make the difference between guilty or not guilty verdicts.

If you are being investigated by the police or face court proceedings then Nottingham criminal defence lawyer Graham Heathcote can be contacted on 0115 9599550 or email him here.

News

Good Character on Trial – Not Guilty Verdict

good character trial nottingham crime solicitor
Nottingham criminal defence solicitor Graham Heatchcote

Nottingham crime solicitor Graham Heathcote recently dealt with a trial arising out of a near accident involving a van for a client of good character.

It may have been surprising that two people of good character moving towards retirement should end up having to give evidence to a court about such a matter, but sometimes these things can allegedly get out of hand.

The complainant in the case maintained that when he had parked his van Graham’s client had approached him, claiming he had nearly been hit by the van.  He was said to have used abusive behaviour.  It was then alleged that Graham’s client had punched the complainant hard, causing his wife to step in and separate the two of them.

Although the complainant only alleged a single punch, his wife maintained that there had been not one but eight punches.

Free legal advice in police interview

Graham’s client had taken advantage of the free legal aid available to him to ensure advice and representation during interview.  This was available even though he was not under arrest.

He answered questions in interview, claiming that he had nearly been knocked down by the van.  Although words were exchanged no punched were thrown.

good character trial criminal defence lawyer
Nottingham Magistrates’ Court

All of the witnesses attended trial.  Both the complainant and his wife give evidence.  Their accounts were significantly different however, and these discrepancies were highlighted by Graham’s expert cross-examination.

In evidence Graham’s client repeated the account he gave in interview.  He maintained that while in the services he had received an injury that even years later meant that he was unable to deliver a blow with any force.

Not Guilty – Client keeps good character

Having heard all of the evidence and Graham’s submissions the Magistrates’ found his client not guilty.  As a result he kept his good character.  Although he was not entitled to legal aid for representation, Graham was able to ask for the return of a significant portion of his agreed affordable fixed-fee costs by way of a Defendant’s Costs Order.

Contact a Nottingham criminal solicitor

Although the facts of the case are perhaps not overly remarkable, the way the trial proceeded and the fact of the not guilty verdict demonstrates the value of solid expert representation by an experienced criminal defence lawyer where reputation is on the line.

It also shows the benefits of securing the services of a solicitor who will represent you for an affordable fee or criminal legal aid to ensure that you have representation to ensure you secure the best possible outcome in court.

If you are being investigated by the police or face court proceedings then Nottingham criminal defence lawyer Graham Heathcote can be contacted on 0115 9599550 or email him here.

News

Domestic Violence Trial in Mansfield – Not Guilty

domestic violence trial mansfield crime solicitor tim haines
Mansfield criminal defence solicitor Tim Haines

Mansfield crime solicitor Tim Haines recently used all of his experience to secure a not guilty verdict in a domestic violence trial.  The case required sensitivity  and a clear trial strategy.

During an acrimonious relationship breakdown, Tim’s client was charged with an allegation of common assault.  He was said to have slapped his son in the presence of his estranged wife.

In interview and thereafter, Tim’s client always maintained his innocence.  He claimed that it was a false allegation designed to make sure he had to leave the matrimonial home.

Special Measures for Child Witness in Domestic Violence Trial

Tim knew that this had the potential to be an emotive trial.  Special Measures were granted to help the young witness give his best evidence.  This meant that he appeared in court over a video link. Although it was a distressing experience for him, Tim had to ask him questions about the incident to test whether witnesses were telling the truth.

Our client’s wife then gave evidence about the incident.

She was followed by Tim’s client who gave evidence on his own behalf along with a character witness.

Tim was then able to address the Magistrates’ as to the evidence in the case.  His client had been consistent in his account to both the police and the court, and was helped by the evidence of good character that he was able to provide.

Not Guilty Verdict and No Restraining Order

domestic violence trial mansfield criminal defence solicitors
Mansfield Magistrates’ Court

On the other hand, there were inconsistencies in the evidence of the young witness and our client’s wife that were significant and not easy to explain away.

As a result, after full deliberation, the Magistrates’ were not persuaded that the prosecution had proved the case to the criminal standard of proof.  They were not sure that Tim’s client had assaulted the child so was found ‘not guilty’.

Contact a Criminal Defence Solicitor in Mansfield

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

Tim Haines can be contacted on 01623 675816 or by using the form below.

Contact

 

 

News

Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court Trial Win

chesterfield criminal solicitor
Chesterfield Solicitor David Gittins

Chesterfield Crime solicitor David Gittins was recently instructed  by a client who faced an allegation of assault in a domestic setting.  The case was heard before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court.

The case called for thorough and diligent preparation.  This included the development of a complex legal argument at a very late stage.  The argument resulted in the prosecution choosing not to pursue the case further.  David’s client had the benefit of a not guilty verdict.

We had represented our client during the investigation stage and David conducted the case before the Magistrates’ Court.

The Allegation

In November 2016 the David’s client was at his home address with his then partner.  An argument began which lasted several hours began. During the argument our client was said to have headbutted the complainant on 3 occasions and tried to bite her to the neck.

David’s client left the address and the police were called immediately by the complainant.  She had a visible injury to her head.

Full Account in Interview

When spoken to by the police, our client accepted that he had been present but had a different version of events.  He said that upon telling his partner during the argument that he was going to leave the property and see a friend the complainant attacked him.  She pushed her head into his, and our client had to push her away so he could leave.

chesterfield crime solicitor
Chesterfield Police Station Representative Rob Lowe

He was again prevented from leaving by being pulled backwards.  Our client again pushed her away fearing a further attack. He said he acted in reasonable self defence and he was in fact the victim.

This account was given in police interview when he was represented by accredited police station representative Rob Lowe.

The Trial

There were no other witnesses to the incident, so David set out to locate information gathered during the police investigation that would strengthen his client’s case.

David obtained a copy of the photograph taken of his client on arrest.  This and the custody record showed that he had no markings to his face supporting the idea that he had headbutted his partner.

Bad Character Evidence

Additionally, David attempted to secure information relating to an earlier incident from August 2016 when his client had called the police alleging that he had been assaulted.  Secondly David wrote to the CPS asking for information about an incident from August 2016 when the Defendant had called the Police alleging that the complainant in this matter had assaulted him.  This might support his client’s account in this case.

This information arrived very late.  This meant that David had to immediately draft an application for his bad character evidence to go before the trial court.  Although the prosecution responded, the response was supplied late and did not contain all of the information that it should.  The hearing was adjourned to the morning of the trial.

The additional information served was previous court decisions.  In fact, they did not help the prosecution.  David addressed the court on the application and this case law.  The court ruled in his client’s favour.  As a result, David was able to ask the complainant about this earlier incident.

Perhaps knowing that David’s client was in the right, the complainant did not attend court for the trial at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court.  Although the prosecution could have applied to adjourn the case, the work that David had done persuaded them not make the application.  No evidence was offered and he was found not guilty.

Client Feedback

David’s client was very pleased, with this outcome, and after the hearing took the time to send David an email thanking him “for everything and the support you’ve provided in the case.”

Funding

David’s client did not have the benefit of legal aid for his case before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court.  This was because his income was too high.  He therefore instructed David on a private basis. David gave a realistic and affordable quote from the outset with the Client being kept informed throughout by email, phone and office appointments.

At the conclusion of the David was successful in securing a Defendant’s Costs Order meaning that David’s bill would be paid out of Central Funds by the government and cost the Defendant nothing.

Contact David Gittins for Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court

Should you wish to contact Chesterfield crime solicitor David Gittins, please telephone him at our Chesterfield office 01246 283000 or email her here.