Angrymum

[Angrymum]

Hello everyone, my son is currently waiting to go to trial he is on a warned list. His accuser is his ex girlfriend. For a year she kept to the same date and my son provided an alibi, that was accepted by the CPS (he was at work). The police told his ex I did not think that they could do that and hey presto she changed her account to an unspecified date 'very close' to the original date. Text messages show that she was inviting him to see her and sleep with her until November (2013). We thought that CPS would throw out the case unfortunately not. My son's solicitor is dumbfounded he has asked CPS to assess the case again as it does not meet the evidential stage. They assessed again and decided that it does. Completely mad and an absolute waste of time and money.

[Casehardened]

Hi and welcome to the forum,

Unfortunately the CPS are strung up on the sword of public opinion post Jimmy S. and are pushing cases through that would have been thrown out a few years ago.

...however do remember that it will be reasonably sensible members of the public who will ultimately make the decision as who is in the right..but please ensure that your solicitor has a good track record in defending cases where false accusations have been made.

(in a day of so I will move this thread into the Falsely Accused section of the forum where more members may view it)

[Angrymum]

Solicitor

Hi and welcome to the forum,

Unfortunately the CPS are strung up on the sword of public opinion post Jimmy S. and are pushing cases through that would have been thrown out a few years ago.

...however do remember that it will be reasonably sensible members of the public who will ultimately make the decision as who is in the right..but please ensure that your solicitor has a good track record in defending cases where false accusations have been made.

(in a day of so I will move this thread into the Falsely Accused section of the forum where more members may view it)

We know his solicitor is brilliant I have concerns about his barrister. I have already expressed my concerns at length in writing to his solicitor as I know barrister had not read the brief, was unaware that plea had gone in and described my son's case as 'unusual your honour as it is a matter of consent'. Obviously with an alibi, consent was moot. Judge quite rightly pointed out that all of her rape cases were about consent. Barrister could not respond as she had messed up. Judge had not got a typed indictment and in any event we have not been served with a new/amended indictment to reflect the new allegation of an 'unspecified date' as the police decided to inform the complainant that my son had an alibi. Interesting bit of investigating turn up and report new evidence to the complainant Hmmmm .... ? Judge had a scrappy handwritten indictment which she was not happy about. Judge said that case would have to be heard this week giving CPS time to get their act together. As yet we have not seen new indictment. I would have thought if we get into court tomorrow they would have missed a time limit. My sons's solicitor has said that once this is over he would like to take my son's case to the Attorney General as the whole case is baseless. Also CPS said that they want to adduce bad character evidence against my son. He was acquitted of previous allegation and this new case is based on ex girlfriend finding out in the press about the first case and realising that she could get some compensation. So my son's solicitor has already defended him and we had a brilliant barrister previously. I am concerned about this new one. It seems to me that the police and CPS are angry that they lost the previous case and are pursuing this one even though there is no evidence to support it. Also interestingly this second case came up as we were fighting the first one and prosecution applied for a Joinder to add these two cases together and the Judge refused as they were so different.

[Casehardened]

as the police decided to inform the complainant that my son had an alibi. Interesting bit of investigating turn up and report new evidence to the complainant Hmmmm .... ?

So many members have reported this happening that the consensus of opinion on the forum is to pass any such evidence on to the solicitor rather than the police in case it is best to 'keep the powder dry'.

In the police's defence they are obliged to put any contradictory evidence to the complainant: after all she might then decide to withdraw the allegation; however false accusers usually have no problem in moving or widening the goalposts.

It's good that your solicitor is on the ball as he has the more important job of preparing the defence case but do push for your choice of barrister; if you don't have absolute confidence in your son's legal team and the worst happens there will always be an element of 'if only'.

[Angrymum]

Solicitor

Thank you for your reply. I was advised by a DCI not to pass alibi evidence to the police and so it was my son's solicitor who collated the evidence and received written sworn statements that were sent to CPS. CPS asked police to investigate alibi which was very simple to do as it was my son's former employers. As soon as the alibi evidence was verified and accepted the police decided that it would be an awfully good idea to keep the complainant in the loop and reported to her. There was no reason to tell her they should have investigated and checked the veracity of her original statement perhaps enquiries along the lines of 'are you certain of your date?'. No they just went to see her and told her and admit this quite brazenly in their statement. It seems extraordinary to me that investigations are carried out like this. I would like to change barrister but as we are on a warned list it is hard to get barristers to take the case on. I don't know how true this is but would gladly ask for another barrister if we had a realistic chance of getting one. It is a bit scary to ask, be refused and be stuck with the one you had little confidence in. I did write to the solicitor and asked for his assurances that she would be 'disputatious' on the day as she stammered and stuttered on first outing and had obviously not read her brief! My son is legally funded.