Youth Justice?

A 14 year old boy was recently spared a custodial sentence at Inner London Crown Court, having pleaded guilty to being in possession of two firearms and live ammunition. He was only sentenced to a youth rehabilitation order due to his age. If he had been 16, the judge would have sentenced him to a minimum of three years in prison.

Sentencing, Judge Chapple commented that “Parliament has tied my hands almost completely. I have no power at all in the particular circumstances of your case to send you to any form of detention.”

So this begs the question, does Parliament have too much control over sentencing guidelines? Or not enough? As has been well documented, two young men were recently sentenced to four years imprisonment for allegedly using Facebook as a vehicle to incite mob violence. Where is the consistency?

Practical, proportionate paedophile provisions

A recent Court of Appeal ruling has disregarded some powers aimed at protecting children from abuse. The previous law allowed judges to ban convicted paedophiles from accessing the internet at all and even visiting their own children. This however was overturned in the Court of Appeal as these men and women have a ‘right to a family life’. Not allowing them to see their children or relatives who weren’t directly involved in the offences would be breaching their human rights.

A review by ministers has stated that the Human Rights Act has had a “chilling effect” on British Law. Philip Davies MP has stated that the criminal justice system is putting the rights of criminals before the victim. Is this really the case?

Having dealt with a large number of these cases, I for one can say that the measures imposed on some of my clients are far and above what is necessary. However,each case is different. The judges commented that not allowing those convicted of child porn cases to use the internet at all restricts the defendant in the use of what is now an essential part of everyday life.
An exceedingly difficult area to police post conviction in these chastened economic times.

Any comments fellow Tweeters, Bloggers, Facebookers or Linked-Inbetweeners?

Just been defending on a child cruelty / assault case. This is against a backdrop of recent NSPCC research suggesting children under the age of 1 year old are 1 in 8 times more likely to be killed than any other age group.

It is said that these children are often born into families whose parents have mental health issues or addiction problems. Over the decades I have represented a number of clients with similar problems. There is often more to these cases than meets the eye on first glimpse however. It is glib to say but each matter has to be assessed and instructions taken. What might appear clear-cut allegations initially, sometimes turn out to be incorrect in fact or when reconciled to the relevant law. One case was where we proved that it was in fact a sibling of the victim who caused the non-accidental injuries. The parent client was acquitted but had suffered months of stress pending her trial.

I often utilise experts such as specialist paediatricians and forensic scientists. I have extensive experience acting for clients with Aspergers / Autism and special needs.

I get referrals to act from a variety of sources including well known Family Law firms in Surrey & Sussex. Also from teachers, social workers and health visitors. Other referrals frequently come from family or friends of the suspect. However, we only act for the accused and strict confidentiality applies as per our usual professional standards. We have represented on these cases at police stations and courts throughout England & Wales.