Duty Solicitor...

[Lee2312]

Hi all. i am currently on bail and used the duty solicitor at the police station. I am unsure whether to stick with him or not.

He did tell me i had nothing to worry about and seemed like a nice guy but do i need a specialist?

Any reccomendations will be appreciated.

[LS]

Hi Lee
You need a specialist sol. Anyone can smile and say you've got nothing to worry about, but then they're not the ones doing time if they get it wrong.

I speak from experience, duty sols don't generally have a clue. I'm sure later in the day more will be on here to advise you better.

[Lee2312]

I thought as much. I understand that there is little a sol can do prior to charge. I just wanted some sound case advice from an experienced practicioner in the area.

Its been over 2 months now and im doing ok, just keeping busy and trying not to think about it 24/7. But its coming to the time now where im considering a good solicitor.

[LS]

Yes, that's true, so everyone's guessing really until such time as paperwork surfaces after charging.
However, if you need advice at this stage then it's best to get it from a sol who knows the field, rather than one who doesn't, and just guesses.

[Lee2312]

Im hoping it wont come to charge but that might be a hurdle i have to face at the time. part of me actually wants to go to court so i can defend myself infron of a judge and jury. Not just being subject to a 1 sided police investigation!

[LS]

Ideally it'll be NFA'd and thus no charge. If you can avoid it, you really don't want to pin all your hopes on telling your side to a jury and hoping they'll find you innocent.

I did that, and ended up with a conviction round my neck because the jury was too stupid to do the right thing. We place too much honesty and credit on juries, when in reality they are ignorant, stupid, biased and in a rush to get home. It's easy for them to pronounce someone guilty, but not enough thought is given to the ramifications of that.
Personal bias has a lot to do with it too, juries are easily swayed into liking or disliking someone purely on what the defendant looks like.

However, if you're good-looking or a tv personality, or a rock guitarist, it seems no jury will convict you......

[Lee2312]

Unfortunately none of the above!

[Saffron]

LS is right.

However, I do understand what you mean about being able to defend yourself in a court of law - I thought the same too! Being able to present your defence and have all sides of the situation presented to "Twelve Good Men and True" is definitely morally preferable to your case being NFAd. Unfortunately the reality is that you do not want to put your fate into the hands of a bunch of people who are there pretty much by accident. Remember that ANYONE can sit on a jury - you do not have to be educated, articulate or intelligent.

There are no tests done prior to selection to ensure that a jury is made up of people who are able to listen to evidence, assess it and make a decision from there. As LS says, most of them will be disinterested, have their own prejudices, and simply want to get home. My husband was the victim of a "Friday afternoon jury" ie: they were at the end of their jury service, the case finished at lunchtime on a friday, and they couldn't be bothered to seriously think about the "evidence".

So, please do everything you can to stop it getting that far. You must get an experienced solicitor. Choose one with a track record of successfully defending false allegations of sex crimes. This is a serious arrestable offence and can carry a life sentence. In fact, if you are falsely convicted it doesn't really matter whether you are sent to prison or not, you will never escape the ramifications - it is a life sentence anyway.

Good luck.

[Lee2312]

Hi Saffron.

Thanks for your input. I can see both sides of the argument. If the case was to go to court i am fully aware that my life is in the hands of 12 strangers.

However, every time i try and speak to the police i am rebuffed. I believe i have alot of information which shows these allegations are not true and infact not possible. So it is entirly down to the police whether i get charged or not.

From what i have read on this forum it is advised that any evidence which helps your cause shouldnt go to the police. All they look for is enough evidence to provide a 'realistic prospect of conviction'.

On the 2 occasions i have spoke to the OIC on the phone he told me 'if the cps believe there is a 51% chance of a conviction i will go to court.

I also told him how difficult it is to defend yourself against such allegations when essentially it is word against word. He told me that both my accuser and myself would 'probably take it to your grave'.

I just cant work it out. Still another 3 months before i answer bail.....!

[Saffron]

Hi Lee

3 months until you answer bail, and you have already been on bail for 2 months? That sounds like a long time for a first bail. I could be wrong, but my understanding is that most first-bails are 3 months, and then you will either be NFAd, re-bailed, or charged.

You are right that you should not pass any evidence that supports you to the police. Keep it safe (preferably not in your house) and pass it to your sol in the event that you are charged.

Essentially the police's job in rape cases is not to investigate but to simply gather evidence that a rape genuinely did take place. Therefore they are inclined to ignore any evidence that may prove your innocence (or anything that at least casts doubt on the veracity of the accuser).

If they have uncovered such evidence themselves it should go into the "unused" bundle which should be passed to your sol after charge. At worst they will "lose" any evidence that supports you. If the evidence is something you have uncovered and passed to them, they will probably just igmore it, and if you have not kept copies they may well not consider it part of their investigation, and may not include it in the "unused" bundle.

Do not underestimate the kudos an officer receives for a successful prosecution, particularly for a case such as rape - politically a very hot potato!

Yes, the 51% the OIC quoted is pretty accurate. If you are charged, a good sol may be able to stop it proceeding to court for a number of different reasons. that is why it is so important to get one in place now. Additionally, if you are on Public Funding (the old Legal Aid) you may not be able to change sols once charged.

Good luck.

[worriedfather]

Hi please do not give anything to the police, from experience the police will ignore anything that does not support their version of events. we had lots of evidence that needed dna checking which plod filed to check as their view was that the evidence was "irrelevant" they also took their time to inform us that she had made a previous false allegation. good luck

[Lee2312]

Hi again Saffron.

Yes nearly 5 months bail in total! I dont see what the police can do in 5 months. This is also considering they arrested me 4 months after the allegation was made!!

Does anybody have any reccomendations for good solicitors?

[Saffron]

Hi Lee

Rights Fighter is the expert on recommending a sol. If you post up the rough area in which you live (county name, not town) then she may know a suitable one. She has not been around for a few days as she is out visiting, but she will be back soon.

Saffron

[Rights Fighter]

Some duty sols are actually really good.

Not knowing which county you are in I cannot advise you as to any solicitors who are experienced in defending false allegations (as opposed to defending sex offences).

Sorry I've been away for a while but stayed last week with a member of my own forum. She has an aggressive form of Cancer and has been given between a few weeks and 12 months to live.

This is the first time in over a week I have managed to get on here. SO - if you want a recommendation please let me know which county you are in (don't put a road name as police regularly view this forum) .

[Lee2312]

Hi Rights Fighter.

I am based in North Lincolnshire.