By Richard Craven, Barrister

I represented a single mother charged with a £94,000 benefit fraud committed over a 6 year period. My client did not disclose to the local council or the DWP that throughout the period, she had been self-employed as a mobile beautician and had received maintenance payments from her ex-partner. In the current climate of fiscal prudence in public expenditure, benefit frauds are treated very seriously by the Court. A benefit fraud of this amount would usually lead to a prison sentence of 18 months. However, careful analysis of the client’s financial accounts revealed that her business was in fact making a only a nominal profit and thus had she disclosed this to the DWP, it would have not affected her entitlement to benefit. The contribution her partner had made still disqualified her from benefits, but I was able to negotiate acceptable pleas with the prosecution to reflect only the dishonest part of the overpayment. As a result the Judge felt able to deal with my client by way of a suspended sentence, much to the relief of my client.

By David Kilty, Solicitor-Advocate

I represented a youth who was accused of throwing stones at a shopkeeper as he left his shop one evening. The shopkeeper had two witnesses who said exactly the same thing namely that the defendant had thrown a stone at him. Initially, the prosecution refused to disclose CCTV from the evening in question, however, we challenged this and the Court ordered the prosecution to disclose the CCTV. A trial proceeded and the three witnesses were rigorously cross examined to reveal the inconsistencies in their accounts. We made a legal submission when the prosecution evidence finished, that there was no case to answer.

The case was stopped and the charges against the defendant were dismissed. The defendant and his mother were delighted at the outcome and thanked the David Phillips and Partners for the thorough preparation of the case. Had this young man not had legal representation he could have been found guilty and sentenced to a period of detention for 6 months.

By Rachel Barrow, Solicitor-Advocate

I represented a client recently for breach of his bail conditions.

The client is required to abide by an electronically monitored curfew at his home address from 7pm to 7am daily. He was arrested by the police, at his home address, at 7pm on 9th July 2011 and kept in custody until 11th July 2011. I attended at Court and carefully considered the papers served by the Crown Prosecution Service. Although G4S had informed the police that my client had breached his bail conditions there was no evidence of this in terms of time or length of absence. I made strenuous representations that the matter should be dismissed. The client was brought before the Court immediately and the breach allegation was withdrawn. The client was then released subject to the same bail conditions and this matter has been referred to our Actions Against the Police team.

By Richard Craven, Barrister

I acted for a 45 year old man of good character who was employed as the financial director of a well known gold trading company. As a result of finding himself in financial difficulties as investments he had made failed to pay off, he stole £35,000 from the company accounts over a period of 9 months by falsifying invoices to make it appear that payments to his own account were in fact payments to the company’s creditors and had falsified company records to give the impression that the payments had been authorised by the company’s managing directors. Theft in a position of trust is treated very seriously by the criminal courts due to the suspicion thrown on innocent employees and the ease with which trusted employees can take advantage of that trust to defraud their employer. The sentence usually imposed for the theft of amounts over £20,000 is one of 2 to 6 years imprisonment. We made sure that we fully prepared a detailed personal mitigation statement which persuaded the Judge to impose a suspended sentence. Our client was delighted with this outcome.

By Richard Craven, Barrister

I recently represented a client charged with 120 Counts of Fraud. Over a three year period, the client had impersonated a Court Interpreter, when not qualified as such and had interpreted for defendants in over one hundred cases including trials in the Crown Court. The courts normally take a dim view of pre-planned frauds committed over a long period of time, particularly in this case as the fraud undermined the administration of justice and potentially led to many cases being reopened on the basis that the client had failed to interpret the Defendant’s account properly. The sentence recommended by the Sentencing Advisory Panel for a high value confidence fraud such is 3 years in prison. I was greatly assisted by the solicitor, Natalie Mortimer who pursued all possible lines of enquiry into the client’s personal circumstances and as a result I was able to persuade the Crown Court Judge not to send my client to prison but to instead impose a suspended sentence with community service.

By David Norman, Solicitor-Advocate

I represented a 60 year old woman recently who had been arrested and charged with driving whilst disqualified. One of the consequences of this offence is a real possibility of a custodial sentence, as Courts take a very dim view of breaches of their orders. Our client’s difficulty was that she had received a ban for 3 years starting in January 2011 and the offence occurred less than 5 months of the disqualification being imposed. I persuaded the Court not to impose a prison sentence and our client was fortunate to receive a 4 month curfew. This is a good example why it is always important to obtain legal representation, even when you intend to admit the offence.

By Joseph Cheminais, Solicitor-Advocate

Yesterday I represented an 18 year old young man accused of threatening behaviour contrary to Section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986. It was alleged that the client had sworn and acted aggressively towards Police officers a charge which our client denied. He entered a plea of “Not Guilty” and the matter was listed for trial. As we discussed the matter with him, our client indicated that although he had sworn at officers he had not used threatening behaviour.

I approached the Crown Prosecution Service who, following discussions, indicated that they would be willing to offer no evidence in respect of the Public Order offence if the client agreed to be ’Bound Over’. This was a good result for the client as had he been found guilty after a trial, his conviction would have lead to a fine and liability to pay prosecution costs. By agreeing to be “Bound Over,” the client entered into a civil contract with the Court to keep the peace for a period of six months and avoided a criminal conviction.

By David Kilty, Solicitor-Advocate

Last week I had some great news which shows that our approach in preparing cases with dogged scrutiny to expose weak points pays off. I represented a Youth who was charged with a public order offence for allegedly swearing at police officers. Our client vehemently denied this and, as usual we challenged the prosecution evidence rigorously. As we prepared for trial, we made numerous enquiries of the prosecution exposing flaws in their case and within 2 weeks the case was dropped to the great relief of our innocent client.