Cases March 2021

R v E 

Our client, an ex-professional footballer faced a serious domestic assault charge, denied throughout. In a highly emotional case, a cold forensic approach was required to dig deeper into the complaint, which unravelled as a result. Clear inconsistencies were found in the prosecution witness evidence when compared with the audio evidence. Despite three witnesses giving evidence against our client, our advocate Oliver Mackrell was able to highlight the deficiencies in the prosecution case and persuade the Magistrates that our client must be acquitted.

R v C 

In a complex drug supply case involving two other defendants, our client had denied the offences at the police station interview saying his role was as a user not a dealer. Through analysing the vast amount of telephone evidence we were able to present a persuasive case to the Crown Prosecution Service, which was eventually accepted shortly before the trial and the case was discontinued against our client.

R v G 

In a very serious allegation of rape and firearms case, our client represented by a QC faced numerous technical applications made by the prosecution and police, to have highly prejudicial material adduced in the trial. This necessitated us employing an IT expert to counter the applications and with forensic preparation and skilful advocacy, the Judge was persuaded to reject the applications. Despite this, our client was found guilty of the allegations.

R v T 

Our client faced an allegation of breaching his stalking protection order, in place to protect a high profile professional. We represented him at the police station and pointed out the weakness of the allegation from the beginning and that the offence had simply not been made out. The case was referred to the Crown Prosecution Service and in a short time, they realised that this was correct and his case was taken no further action the same day as his police interview.

The same client faced another allegation of breaching his stalking protection order. Again, we represented him at the police station when his robust defence was made very clear to the police but this time he was charged. At trial our advocate carefully reiterated that the client could not have committed the two breaches and the district judge threw the case out at half time due to clear issues with the prosecution case.

R v M 

When representing a very vulnerable client alleged to have assaulted security at a club and police officers, we obtained background information on our client and took statements to assist in our efforts to have the charges changed to a caution. We made representations to the police, advising that our client be offered a caution instead, given her good character and complex background, but this was refused.

The case was continued in court and despite the police rejection to our request, we made further representations to the Crown Prosecution Service to discontinue the case as it clearly was not in the public interest to continue and this was fortunately agreed.

R v B 

Our client faced allegations of two domestic burglaries, one reliant on forensic evidence linking him to the scene and the other on CCTV footage – stills, reflecting his proximity to the attacked premises over a very short window of opportunity.

Despite his previous convictions for burglary (bad character) being adduced by the prosecution and an unsuccessful defence abuse of process argument to dismiss the CCTV matter as the police failed to seize the footage at the time it became known it existed, the jury acquitted him of this burglary.