Freephone: 0800 1933 999
Mobile Freephone: 01623 397 200

Chat Online

Criminal Defence Blog

Archive for September, 2016

Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving

causing serious injury by dangerous driving

Causing Serious Injury by Dangerous Driving.

 

 

Section 143 of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 created an offence of causing serious injury by dangerous driving by amending the RTA 1988 and inserting a new section 1A. This amendment came into force on 3 December 2012.

 

The offence is committed when the manner of the defendant’s driving is dangerous and results in another person suffering a serious physical injury.  

 

Euan was under investigation for this offence following a car collision with a friend he’d had an argument with.  Euan was arrested the night of the incident and released on bail pending the police’s investigations.  Euan knew that the charge was serious and that he needed legal representation, so he called Forrest Williams.

 

Once Euan was formally charged with causing serious injury by dangerous driving, we were able to review the prosecution paperwork.  Whilst Euan did admit he was driving the vehicle which ultimately led to a head on collision, his version of events differed dramatically.  We believed that although he was guilty, the version of events Euan presented would make a dramatic difference to the level of sentence that would be imposed.

 

Causing serious injury by dangerous driving can be heard in either the Magistrates court or the Crown Court. In the Magistrates, Euan would be looking at a fine and a custodial sentence of up to 6 months. In the Crown, he would be looking at up to 5 years’ imprisonment. Both courts impose a disqualification from driving for a minimum of 2 years.

 

As you can see from the above, the sentence does vary greatly and if Euan was to accept the case that the prosecution put forward he would most certainly be looking at 5 years’ imprisonment.

 

We worked tirelessly with Euan to present a basis of plea (Euan’s version of events) to the court. The Magistrates sent Euan’s case up to the Crown Court due to the severity of the incident – it involved a head on collision with another car which led to the other members of the vehicle being seriously injured: the passenger had concussion, and the driver of the other vehicle had suffered a broken hip as a result of the incident.

 

Euan accepted full responsibility and showed genuine remorse for his actions: he expected to be punished, but wanted the victims and the court to see how this had affected him and how a lengthy custodial sentence would not only affect him but his young family of a fiancée and small child.

 

Fortunately, the prosecution accepted the basis of plea and Euan’s hearing was adjourned for sentencing. We were fully expecting Euan to go to prison, but were fighting for this sentence to be as low as possible to minimise his separation from his young child.

 

Euan and his fiancée arrived at the court for sentencing, with the same experienced barrister who had represented him at his previous two hearings.  Whilst he was understandably nervous, he expressed how much easier it was with the support and consistency of his barrister, and caseworker Kirsty Day fighting his corner.

 

When we arrived at court, imagine our surprise when the judge overrode the previous decision to accept the basis of plea! The basis was withdrawn in its entirety and we were “back to square one”.

 

Euan, his fiancée, and us were all heartbroken.  Thankfully Forrest Williams are prepared for everything and the barrister was already ready to present full mitigation to advocate for the most lenient sentence.

 

Euan’s barrister presented the strongest mitigation and the judge advised:

 

“You pleaded guilty at the first opportunity. You drove your car dangerously causing serious injury. This plea was entered on a basis which you no longer rely on. I now sentence you on the full facts of this case. You are entitled to full credit for your plea. I have seen a number of references referring to your character, employment, relationships and your family. You had made significant progress in obtaining good work and had a future. This offence is plainly so serious that only immediate custody is appropriate. But for the mitigation and your plea of guilty the offence itself I would be starting in the region of 4 years. However, the mitigation put forward enables me to reduce my starting point before credit to 3 years for which you receive a full credit.”

 

Euan was sentenced to 2 years’ imprisonment. His barrister met with Euan after the hearing where he advised he was thrilled with the outcome given the circumstances. 

 

If you are facing a charge of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, call Forrest Williams now on 01623 397200.

 

 

 

Recognised Leader in Criminal Law – AI Legal Awards 2016

leader in criminal law

 

Recognised Leader in Criminal Law – AI Legal Awards 2016

 

Forrest Williams are delighted to be recognised as the Leader in Criminal Law by AI Legal Awards 2016.

 

This recognition comes part way through a great year for us as a firm with a high number of our cases being resolved successfully either before formal charge or at trial.  Our recent success stories include many cases of sexual offences, frauds and violence offences.

 

Our team routinely advise people on all aspects of criminal law while following our firm ethos of always providing honest advice and  excellent client care.  We are knowledgeable in all areas of criminal law. 

 

Our clients frequently transfer to us from Legal Aid firms, realising that our private firm can offer a truly bespoke service perfect for their individual needs.  We are used to supporting not only clients, but also our clients’ families, through the ordeal of criminal trials.  That can include simple touches like sending updates by group eMails to the whole family, or larger gestures like organising a case worker to attend Court hearings simply to sit with and support the family. 

 

We pride ourselves on  recognising that every case, and every client, is different.  We have no standard approaches to cases, assessing each case entirely on its own merits and the unique needs of each individual client.  We were recently instructed by the father of a defendant facing a charge of sexual assault. 

 

At the end of the case the father, who lives on the other side of the world and was understandably anxious throughout the proceedings and waited desperately for each update from us, said: 

 

“Thank you for all your help throughout this difficult time. Our only real comfort was knowing you were representing him. Your kind and considerate attitude along with your attention to detail and professionalism was simply outstanding.”

 

If you are looking for a legal firm that is a leader in criminal law, call our team now on 01623 397200.

 

Best Sexual Assault Solicitors Secure Victory At Trial

best sexual assault solicitors

 

Best Sexual Assault Solicitors Secure Victory At Trial

 

Darrell contacted us absolutely bewildered and terrified. He had been wrongly charged with sexual assault.

 

He just did not know what to do.

 

From our first conversation with Darrell it became apparent that this was clearly a malicious allegation.

 

Lucy, the alleged victim was the sister of Charlie, who was, at the time, a tenant of Darrell’s. Charlie, however, had not paid her rent in months, so Darrell was having to go through the process of evicting her from the flat. Because Charlie was young, her mum acted as guarantor, and so Darrell, as per the agreement, was contacting Charlie and Lucy’s Mum to recover the outstanding rent.

 

Lucy became involved a few days before the eviction was due to take place. She contacted Darrell and appeared to be the more reasonable sister and was arranging for Charlie to hand over the keys to the flat. 

 

An agreement was put into place and the three of them met up at Charlie’s flat and the key was handed over. The flat was in a state, and items had gone missing.  Darrell decided that he would go forward with obtaining the outstanding rent from their Mum due to the state of the property.

 

Lucy invited Darrell back to her house for a cup of tea, so that they could discuss things and get everything sorted. Again Lucy was very determined to try and persuade Darrell to not pursue her mother for the outstanding rent.

 

Lucy started talking about her tattoos, and began to show them to Darrell (without his request).  Darrell was not interested.  Lucy then asked Darrell to touch a scar in the centre of her back to see if it was raised.

 

Darrell was there for around 45 minutes.

 

A few days later Darrell was arrested on suspicion of Sexual Assault against Lucy.

 

He was charged and given a date to attend Derby Magistrates Court.

 

This is when he contacted us, looking for the best sexual assault solicitors to help him.

 

We arranged for Darrell to come in and meet his caseworker, Jess Sadler [pictured above], face to face so he could tell us what happened.

 

There were no time limits.  It was just Darrell’s chance to tell us what really happened, and we were there to listen for as long as he needed.

 

We started preparing his case immediately. We knew how important this was to him, and how life changing it would be if he was falsely convicted of the offence.

 

It was a difficult case from the beginning. It was essentially his word against hers, with no evidence to support either version of events.

 

Darrell was represented by our senior solicitor, Steve Williams.  Steve has over 25 years’ experience in criminal matters and is personally known to Derby Magistrates.  Darrell wanted the best sexual assault solicitors and there was no better person to represent Darrell.

 

As the best sexual assault solicitors in the area, we are used to thinking outside the box and building every case individually, free from templates, pro-formas or any other restrictions.  In this case, we decided that due to the lack of third-party evidence to support our case, we would use something that nobody could deny to persuade the Magistrates to believe Darrell’s version of events.

 

We used Darrell.

 

Darrell had been a landlord for many years, and so many of his tenants wanted to help in whatever way they could to repay the help that Darrell had given to them. We contacted each of them, explained the process and took witness statements from them all.

 

The point was we wanted to show to the court that Darrell was not the type of person who would commit this offence.

 

Darrell came in and had numerous meetings with his caseworker, and met with Steve before the trial to prepare him for what was going to happen and help him through cross examination.

 

The trial day came.

 

Darrell attended with his witnesses, Steve and his caseworker.

 

We went into court and the prosecution opened the case and called Lucy to the stand. Lucy gave evidence which completely contradicted the statements she had given to the police.

 

Steve cross-examined her and highlighted all of these discrepancies in her evidence.

 

Lucy’s mum was then called to give evidence, as it was alleged that Lucy rang her straight after the alleged incident to tell her about what had happened. This evidence again contradicted everything that was said in both cross-examination of Lucy and her police statements.

 

At this stage the prosecution case was finished.

 

It was our turn to put forward Darrell’s defence.

 

We asked for a short moment to discuss with our client.

 

We went out and explained that he was in such a strong position right now, and so we advised that it was worthwhile making a submission that there was no case to answer to the court.

 

If it was successful then the case would be thrown out and that would be the end of the matter.

 

We explained the pros and cons of making the submission, and Darrell agreed it was worth a go.

 

Steve went into the court room and made a very persuasive argument as to why there was no case to answer.

 

The Magistrates went away and considered our application.

 

After a short five minutes they returned.

 

No case to answer.

 

Darrell was free to go.

 

Darrell and his partner were overwhelmed.  We had saved Darrell from having to stand up in court, and had protected his innocence.

 

We are now working with Darrell to recover his legal fees from the National Taxing Team. 

 

If you need the best sexual assault solicitors to defend you, call us now on 01623 397200. 

 

Forrest Williams TV