Freephone: 0800 1933 999
Mobile Freephone: 01623 397 200

Chat Online

Criminal Defence Blog

Archive for the ‘Criminal Offences’ Category

Burglary Solicitors Get Investigation Dropped

 

 

 

Burglary Solicitors Get Investigation Dropped

 

We were contacted quite some time ago by a father concerned about his son. You see his son had gone out with friends one evening.  He had been drinking, he had taken drugs, and now he was being investigated on suspicion of committing a number of offences – including Burglary and breaking into and stealing from a number of vehicles. At this stage he had not been charged with anything, he had been arrested and investigations were ongoing. The tricky part here was that the defendant had no recollection of the events of that evening at all – making it hard to raise an effective defence from the start.

 

We were not the first company he had contacted. He already had a solicitor lined up ready to meet with his son at the interview in 6 weeks time. He just felt helpless, he felt like there must be more he could do. We know this because he told us, he was very open and honest about the position when he contacted us. He explained that he had already spoken with a company who had confirmed they would have a solicitor (name to be confirmed at the time) at the station, they then thanked him for his instructions and advised they would see him on that date. But what about now? What about the next 6 weeks? What could he be doing to help his son in that time? That is what he wanted to know.

 

The issue with Legal Aid is that it limits the work that can be done.  So yes they could and would arrange for a solicitor to be present at the interview (everyone is entitled to free representation at the station irrespective of potential charge or their income) but they would not be doing work before this time – they had no remit to do so and would not be paid for this.

 

Private burglary solicitors, however, such as Forrest Williams, can do a lot in that time. We can take a full statement from the accused, and from any friends who may be able to support or shed light on the situation.  We can undertake investigations to secure time-sensitive evidence.  We can liaise with the police to try to obtain further details of the evidence against the accused.  Above all we can be a source of support during that time. The father instructed us to help his son.

 

Initially our client was arrested on suspicion of the following:

 

 

Our client accepted the drugs offences, he knew he had taken drugs and believed it was highly probable he would have still had a small amount of each (Cannabis and Valium) on him. He did not think he would have broken into any cars and was certain he would not have burgled someone’s house – he felt sick at the mere thought of these latter offences.

 

The Officer in this case was very happy to accommodate our requests for information, she knew that the best way to get to the bottom of this was to work with us to talk. She provided us with a list of the recovered items, she explained the strange circumstances of the ‘Burglary’ – and because of this we were able to talk through these with our client. Our client, though distressed at the idea, accepted the Theft from a Motor Vehicle offences – because the list of items and circumstances “rang a bell”.  He very definitely maintained that he was not guilty of the Burglary, and this was his main concern.  As burglary solicitors, we understood our client’s fears about being charged with this serious offence which he completely denied.

 

We arranged for our client to be represented at the station by a qualified individual familiar with his case.  Because of this and our preparations we were able to ensure that the interview was a productive one not simply a ‘no comment’. Following this our client was charged with the offences he accepted but, most importantly, he was NOT charged with the Burglary offence.

 

We continued to support our client and his family in the run up to the court hearing and arranged for one of our expert Barristers to represent him at this time.  We were even able to arrange for him to meet with the Probation Service before the hearing to ensure that there was not a requirement for a further hearing because we knew that our client needed to be able to accept the penalty to be able to move past his mistakes.

 

Both our client and his family were very happy with the service they received from Forrest Williams, with his father commenting at the end that he was glad he had trusted his gut and sought a second opinion.

 

If you are being investigated and need burglary solicitors on your side, then give Forrest Williams a call. Our dedicated and trained team will listen to your situation and advise you as to the best way forward for you.

01623 397200

 

 

Can I Challenge or Remove A Caution After Accepting It?

Can I Challenge or Remove A Caution After Accepting It?

 

If you have accepted a caution in relation to an offence and now wish to challenge it or have it removed for some reason, the brief answer is that yes, such a thing is possible.  It is not, however, easy or straightforward, and you will certainly want to take specialist legal advice.

 

This page is designed to provide an overview of the ways of challenging or removing a caution.  Contact us for advice about your specific circumstances.

 

 

 

Essentially the potential routes to removal are:

 

(1) by way of complaint about the use of and manner in which it was administered. So consider if there was anything to suggest they did not follow their correct procedure.  Of course, this requires knowledge of what correct procedure is, so specialist legal advice should be sought on this point.

 

(2) issue judicial proceedings (see outline below). Warning: this is a costly procedure and losing can mean there are even greater costs implications in respect of covering expenses incurred by the other side.  Proceed with caution!

 

An outline of Judicial Review in reference to Caution

 

Where a simple caution has been accepted by the offender, and administered by the police, there is no formal right of appeal. However the caution may be challenged by making a formal complaint against the police force, and by making an application to be judicially reviewed.  Judicial review is the mechanism by which the courts ensure that public bodies have acted within the powers they have been given.

 

Procedure

 

Judicial Review may be made against any public body or if the body making the decision is exercising a public law function.  Any individual wishing to make an application must have sufficient interest in relation to the matter in which the claim relates. In relation to a caution, any individual who receives a caution will be deemed to have sufficient interest to make the claim, as they are personally affected by a police force’s decision.

 

An application for Judicial Review of a caution must be filed promptly, and within a period of no more than 3 months, after which the grounds for Judicial Review arose. Although an application may be made out of this time period this is only in exceptional circumstances. Any application should be made without any undue delay.

 

Challenges

 

An application for Judicial Review of a caution can be challenged on the basis of Illegality; where the police force has acted without legal authority. The police force are required to ensure that all the relevant steps are complied with and that a caution is appropriate in the circumstances. The police must: 

 

  1. Ensure that the offender understands that they do not have to make an immediate decision on whether to accept the simple caution but can consider the matter and, if need be, take independent legal advice; 

 

  1. Ensure the offender understands that they have the right to legal advice at any time during the process; 

 

  1. Ensure that the offender understands the effect of the simple caution and the implications of accepting the caution;

 

  1. Ensure that the offender has made a clear and reliable admission of guilt in respect of the offence or offences for which the simple caution is being administered; 

 

  1. Confirm that the offender consents to receiving a simple caution; 

 

  1. Ask the offender to sign a form setting out the implications of the simple caution (“the simple caution form”); 

 

  1. Sign the simple caution form themselves and provide the offender with a copy to take away. 

 

If the police have failed to comply with any of the above requirements, or those set out in the PACE codes, then the court may consider it suitable to quash the caution altogether.

 

If you would like to challenge or remove a caution, contact our expert team for further advice on 01623 397200.

 

Awards - Frames - Medium - 1000 x 313 (No Scaling Req)

 

Legal Knowledge Alone Isn’t Enough

Steve Williams of Forrest Williams

Steve Williams of Forrest Williams

 

Legal Knowledge Alone Isn’t Enough

 

As a lawyer our job is not just about knowing the law, it is also about knowing what is best for each individual client.

 

Today I was representing a client on a very sensitive charge. He was very nervous about it getting out in the press. He had never been in court before and not surprisingly he was very anxious. He faced serious charges and we hope to be able to avoid prison eventually, but appreciated that the court would initially view the matter as so serious that they would send them to the Crown Court.

 

We were happy with that because whilst the Crown Court have more sentencing powers and could actually send him to prison for longer we believe that they were likely to be more lenient than the magistrates court. The reason for this is that they are more used to serious charges whereas this would be one of the more serious, and shocking offences that the magistrates would see. A Crown Court Judge would be more likely to be able to put it into perspective. A Crown Court Judge is also more likely to be confident enough to deal with it without sending my client to prison, whereas magistrates can be more inclined to follow their sentencing guidelines strictly.

 

Having fully prepared in advance we took the view that we would not argue against the matter going to the Crown Court.

 

We got to court early, and I spoke to the Legal Adviser. Because of the nature of the hearing and because everything had been agreed thanks to our preparation and early arrival, she was able to do it herself and she agreed to deal with it before the magistrates arrived. The client didn’t even need to go into the court room.

 

The matter was dealt with in seconds; a date for the Crown Court hearing was given and we left the court before it formally opened and before any press arrived.

 

The client was delighted. We managed to get the matter dealt with without his biggest fears of the day happening – namely having to go into court and the fear of the press being there.

 

Apart from knowing that this could be done, very little of the result came as a result of legal knowledge. Instead it came from –

 

Recognising what was important to the client;

Caring enough to do this;

Being fully prepared beforehand;

Having a policy that means we only deal with one client per advocate. You know with us that your lawyer won’t be distracted by juggling several other cases;

Giving clients our focused and undivided attention;

Getting enough publicity from our awards and recognition that we don’t have to seek attention through our clients’ names in the paper

 

If your case is so important that you want your lawyers’ undivided and personal attention, go private. Call us on 01623 397200 to discuss how we could help you.

 

 

 

Forrest Williams TV