Cases March 2019

R v R

A domestic violence incident, which took place in a bar in Brighton, faced our client and if found guilty he could have received  a term of custody imprisoned. Careful analysis of the evidence, particularly the cctv, showed inconsistencies with the complainant’s evidence against independent evidence, which undermined the prosecution. Representations were made to the Crown and shortly before the trial they discontinued the case due to an unrealistic prospect of conviction after trial. The client was extremely grateful and relieved.

R v L

The Crown charged our client with supplying class A drugs which was denied in court on the basis that he was under duress from a known London gangster. Through taking detailed instructions from our client, gathering supporting evidence and challenging police intelligence sources, it was discovered that our client was subject to high level police surveillance due to the association with this kingpin. In such a situation the prosecution can be compromised due to ongoing high level police investigations and a skilfully worded letter to the prosecution resulted in a discontinuance of the case.

R v C

A suspect in a speeding allegation instructed us that he wasn’t the driver and that he had not received notice and therefore he should not be liable for the additional charge of failing to notify the name of the driver. We collated background information on his poor medical health, took a statement from the driver of the car at the time of the speeding and made representations to the CPS that the matter be dropped due to it not being in the public interest.  The prosecution considered our letter and duly discontinued the case against our client.

R v F

The Crown charged our client with supplying drugs with two other people, which our client had denied from the beginning. Prior to the first hearing in the crown court we meticulously analysed the case papers and realised that the offence could not be proved, irrespective of any defence. We pointed this out to the prosecutor and advised of our intention to apply for an application to dismiss. After deliberation the prosecution agreed with our representations and discontinued the case against our client

R v M

We represented our client at the police station for a very serious offence of arson with intent to danger life. On our advice she gave a full and detailed account raising her defence. The prosecution decided to charge her and after many months of skilfully preparing the case for trial, liaising with senior counsel and experts, she was acquitted after a vigorously defended and complex trial.

R v J

The client was found unconscious on the street in the centre of Brighton and assisted by police. The client was intoxicated and under the influence of a drug, which led her to be very volatile and unpredictable. She assaulted an officer and when taken to the police station assaulted another 3 officers. We represented her at the police station and after taking our advice she fully admitted the offences and showed remorse in the hope of receiving a caution, as this was the first time she had been arrested. This was not accepted by the police and she was charged. After taking full instructions it was discovered that she had been the victim of domestic violence at the time of the offence. She had in fact been almost drowned hours before the incident and as a result of this toxic relationship, she essentially had a mental breakdown whilst with the police.

At court we applied for an adjournment to give the police time to reconsider giving her a caution. She was a professional worker and a conviction would have seriously prejudiced her career. Despite the Crown opposing this, the magistrates allow the adjournment and subsequently the police, on considering our letter, agreed to offering a caution.

R v C

Our client was allegedly involved in a very serious and high level drugs conspiracy which stretched across counties. The case involved in excess of 10,000 pages of evidence and a number of defendants. He was found guilty after trial and faced a sentence which started at 4.5 years. However, throughout the trial we had managed to extract evidence from the police and social services that the client was vulnerable and being cuckood by drug gangs. As a result we were able to put forward a strong mitigation case to the judge who sentenced the client to 18 months imprisonment which was to be suspended for 18 months, thus avoiding an immediate custodial sentence.