News Archive 2012
19 December 2012: Taxi driver retains licence and livelihood
It’s one of the things that every driver dreads – being involved in a road traffic incident where a pedestrian is struck by a vehicle. This is exactly what happened to a taxi driver client who was going about his work when his vehicle was involved in a collision with a pedestrian. The pedestrian sustained an injury that required hospital treatment.
MTM made a successful legal submission of ‘no case to answer’ because there was insufficient evidence to demonstrate that the quality of the client’s driving at the time in question fell below the standard expected of a careful and competent driver. It was a crucial outcome for our client whose driving licence was at stake: had he been convicted, he would have been unable to work as a taxi driver – leading to the loss of his employment.
14 December 2012: Careful defence work leads to discontinuation of road traffic prosecution case
Being stopped as a motorist by the police can happen in any number of circumstances. This was exactly the experience of an MTM client who was asked to produce documents at the roadside. Unfortunately, our client was unaware that his driving licence had been apparently revoked by the DVLA, which meant that his insurance policy was also invalid.
Behind-the-scenes research by MTM lawyers revealed inconsistencies between the police records relating to our client’s driving licence and the records held by the DVLA. MTM was therefore able to persuade the Procurator Fiscal to take the view that the prosecution against our client on these charges should be discontinued.
7 December 2012: MTM successfully challenges relevancy of charge
An MTM client, who was charged on a summary complaint with breaching the Sexual Offences Act 2003, has had the case against him thrown out. This very serious charge may well have resulted in a sentence of imprisonment.
A close examination of the charge against the client resulted in MTM identifying a legal flaw in the drafting of the charge on the complaint. MTM moved quickly to challenge the relevancy of the charge at a legal debate in the Sheriff Court. So effective was the challenge that the Sheriff was successfully persuaded that the complaint should be dismissed because of the drafting error in the charge. It is one thing to identify a legal error, and another to persuade in a debate – MTM was able to achieve both, and get the case thrown out on a legal technicality thanks to its attention to detail and powers of persuasion.
3 December 2012: Client defended in dog control case
MTM was called in to defend the owner of a dog that was alleged to be dangerously out of control in a public place. The allegation was that the dog had bitten the owner of another dog on the face.
The case proceeded to trial, but, after careful and detailed cross-examination of the Crown witnesses by MTM’s lawyer, the person who was bitten by the dog conceded that it might in fact have been her own dog which had bitten her and caused her injury. Skilful cross-examination was decisive in securing this outcome and in removing the threat of an order for destruction that would have been served in relation to the client’s dog had the client been convicted.
29 November 2012: MTM succeeds with little-known Road Traffic law defence
An MTM client was facing a charge of being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle in terms of the Road Traffic Act 1988, Section (5)(b). The client indicated that he had no intention of driving the vehicle whilst drunk, and MTM used the little known defence under Section 5(2) of the Road Traffic Act 1988 which allows a Court to find a person not guilty of the charge if there is no likelihood of them driving a motor vehicle whilst a proportion of alcohol in their breath or blood exceeds the prescribed limit.
After a trial involving defence witnesses, MTM was able to persuade the Sheriff that the client should be found not guilty of the charge, thereby saving him from the possibility of being disqualified for a period of time. This was an important case because the client was a self-employed man who required his motor vehicle to carry out his work as a landscape gardener.
25 November 2012: MTM takes a stand in defence of legal aid and justice for all
In a climate where access to legal aid is under real threat, MTM solicitor-advocate Martin Morrow helps to outline the case for the defence in an article by Dani Garavelli of Scotland on Sunday.
28 October 2012: Cameras in court? Solicitor Advocate outlines the consequences for justice
Neil Hay, a solicitor advocate with Falkirk’s MTM Defence Lawyers, explains why letting cameras into courtroomswould be detrimental to the interests of justice and have unfortunate and lasting consequences.
24 October 2012: MTM wins court legal debate on amendment of charge
An MTM lawyer has won a complicated case which led to a legal debate about whether a charge was capable of amendment. The lawyers was defending a client in a Sheriff Court trial for racially abusive conduct under Section 50A of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995. After detailed legal submissions based on expert knowledge of the law, MTM was able to persuade the Sheriff that there was insufficient evidence in law to convict the accused either of the racial conduct or even of a straightforward breach of the peace. The submission resulted in the client’s acquittal.
8 October 2012: Championing legal aid
MTM has always been passionate about legal aid and access to justice for people of all means and backgrounds. Director Murray Aitken attended the annual Scottish Legal Aid Board and Law Society Conference on Friday 8 October 2012 as part of this commitment.
The firm is expert in providing clear advice and guidance to its legal aid clients and in making successful applications for legal aid on their behalf. All of this is based on being up to date with the very latest developments; at MTM we take every opportunity to be at the forefront of legal aid developments so we can give our clients the very best advice and assistance – in all cases.
5 October 2012: MTM Defence Lawyers nominated Top Tier firm by The Legal 500
MTM Defence Lawyers has been nominated a Top Tier firm in latest edition of the Legal 500, the legal profession’s ‘industry bible’ of recommended firms and practitioners. MTM is one of only four criminal defence firms across the whole of Scotland to receive the top accreditation.
MTM is the only solicitors firm in Falkirk or Stirling to be represented in the Legal 500 (www.legal500.com), which recommends lawyers in over 100 countries worldwide.
MTM’s inclusion is an acknowledgement of the firm’s expertise in criminal law and client service. All firms that apply for admission are rigorously vetted in a process that involves detailed client interviews and measurement against a range of professional standards.
We would like to thank all of our clients for their support, now and in the future. We look forward to helping you, with whatever legal issues you may be facing, to secure the best result for you in court and out of court.
2 October 2012: MTM educates the lawyers of tomorrow
Solicitor Advocate Neil Hay has been appointed by the University of Glasgow to deliver Advocacy training to newly qualified lawyers as part of their compulsory Professional Education and Training Stage Two Legal Training. Neil is jointly delivering a three-part Advocacy Course with Sheriff Vannet who is the former Procurator Fiscal for Glasgow and a Sheriff based at Airdrie. Details of the course can be found here: http://www.gla.ac.uk/schools/law/continuingprofessionaldevelopmentcpd/courses/advocacy/
25 September 2012: Client’s dog saved from ‘death row’
An MTM client who was facing prosecution for being in charge of a dog that was dangerous in terms of the Dangerous Dogs Act 1991 has seen a successful outcome for himself and his dog. In such cases, one of the sanctions open to the Court is to order that the dog be put to sleep if a finding of guilt is made. The law in this respect is complex and focuses around control of the dog at the relevant time and the prior history of the dog.
MTM carried out diligent research into the layout of the area where the incident occurred. Detailed cross-examination by MTM of the Crown witnesses in relation to this point revealed information that led directly to the Procurator Fiscal indicating that she was no longer proceeding with the case. The client, who was deeply concerned for the welfare of his pet, was greatly relieved that a verdict of not guilty was returned.
25 September 2012: Detailed medical research proves essential to a case
In a recent very unfortunate case a client faced an allegation of assault to severe injury, permanent impairment and permanent disfigurement. A great deal of medical evidence was led to establish the existence of a debilitating condition as a direct result of the alleged assault. MTM Defence Lawyers sought and recovered the full medical history of the complainer in the case and the hospital records in relation to the injury itself.
Research carried out by MTM not only suggested that the alleged new condition was in reality a pre-existing one, but it also suggested that the hospital records in respect of the alleged victim may well have been inaccurate. The new information meant that medical evidence could be resolutely challenged as part of the cross-examination of the medical witnesses. The Jury were able to return a unanimous verdict of not guilty within 15 minutes of retiring to consider their verdict.
21 September 2012: MTM use Human Rights legal knowledge to out-manoeuvre prosecution team in serious drugs case
A very serious drugs case at Glasgow Sheriff Court has been discontinued by the Crown after MTM used its expertise in the area of Human Rights Law criminal procedure to seize the advantage and put the prosecution team on the back foot.
The case was one in which it was alleged that an MTM client had been concerned in the supply of heroin. MTM had been seeking information that included the details of an alleged confession made by our client – information that had not been disclosed by the Prosecutor’s Office to the MTM defence team. In all cases, the prosecution is under a duty to disclose information to the defence which is relevant to the prosecution, particularly in evidence they may intend to use at trial.
As a result of the lack of disclosure, one of our Solicitor Advocates drafted a “Devolution Issue Minute” which was lodged with the Court. The Court agreed to appoint a debate for the Devolution Issue Minute to be considered. Had the Minute been successful then the whole proceedings would have been thrown out by the Sheriff. As it happened the Procurator Fiscal instead decided to discontinue the proceedings against our client instead of waiting for the Sheriff’s decision.
15 September 2012: MTM secures short sentence in supply of Class A drugs case – despite aggravating circumstances
Failing to attend Court is in itself a very serious charge. MTM has represented a client who failed to attend a preliminary hearing at Edinburgh High Court in relation to a charge of supplying a Class A drug, itself a serious offence and one for which the maximum penalty is 5 years imprisonment.
Following his failure to attend, a warrant was issued for his arrest and he pled guilty to a charge of failing to attend at Court under Section 102 (A) of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. One of MTM’s Solicitor Advocates represented him in these proceedings which took place at Edinburgh Sheriff Court. MTM was able to persuade the Sheriff to limit the period of imprisonment imposed to only two months which was a particularly exceptional result for the client.
10 September 2012: Sentence reduced by over a third on appeal
In appeals work, decisive action is required just as much as legal expertise and expert representation: there are strict time limits on appeals. In some cases, as a client you may have only 7 days to act. Clients wishing to appeal need to seek legal representation immediately to be sure they get the best result.
MTM has represented a client in a Sheriff Court who had pled guilty to four separate charges on four separate complaints. He had over 50 previous convictions and had previously served many sentences of imprisonment. The Sheriff ordered that he should serve a total period of 19 months imprisonment in relation to the four complaints.
Despite the fact that our client had over 50 previous convictions, we were still successful in persuading Senior Appeal Court Judges at the Court of Criminal Appeal that the sentences were excessive. The Court, rather dramatically, slashed the total sentence of 19 months imprisonment imposed by the Sheriff and ordered a new sentence of only 12 months imprisonment, removing over a third of the original sentence.
24 August 2012: Requirement for corroboration under attack
Solicitor Advocate Martin Morrow of MTM Defence Lawyers takes issue with QC and Solicitor General Lesley Thomson’s assertion that removal of the requirement for corroboration "would be a significant step forward in terms of the prosecution of domestic abuse cases". Read the original piece from The Herald and Mr Morrow's analysis below of the importance of this legal safeguard.
Analysis by Martin Morrow
The main stream article here is truly depressing. It is really an effort to continue to feed into the public thought process that to paraphrase Animal Farm no corroboration good -corroboration bad. The chosen vehicle is the usual domestic violence route. Tried tested and duly emotive.
The truth is that the operation of zero tolerance is hopelessly flawed. Nobody can criticise the sound bite in theory - in practice it is different I spend every day of my life in the custody court. It is full of domestic cases. In very many of these there is stunned disbelief on the part of the accused when they are told that they may get bail , with special conditions not to go home or to contact their partner directly/indirectly. They remonstrate - I did nothing wrong/my partner if anyone was in the wrong/there was nothing in it/we have been married 20 years. A considerable number of their partners come to court and say the same. They too are stunned as they are told the court is about to destroy their family life. They don't believe what I am telling them.
In court some are brave enough to try and tell the fiscal in court. No matter - orders are orders. The vast majority of these people are not at court. They only find out when the accused fails to come home. They usually phone me in disbelief. Fix this. It was all a mistake. Who will look after the kids when I am supposed to work. Was that judge off his head? I tell both of them if the bail conditions are broken that's a separate offence worth up to a year in jail. They cannot believe it.
Next we go through the faradiddle of trying to vary the conditions. A hearing is set. The police are meant to go and see the alleged victim to see what they want. Even then the application is more likely to be opposed than not - after all statistically someone will get badly injured/killed by a partner on bail. Better to cover your back by opposing the application. Tough on the rest of the applicants. Rely on safeguarding the integrity of the proceedings as a ground of opposition.
Then we reach the trial. By then many alleged victims have written to the fiscal indicating they want the process stopped. Tough -it's not up to you. At the trial reluctant alleged victims often give poor quality evidence and suffer memory failure. By now they hate everything about the judicial process. Then they are questioned as hostile witnesses - prior statements are put to them and the whole exercise is futile. That is the reality of this policy in everyday practice. That is not to say that there are not people who are violent, manipulative and downright unpleasant. Taking a blunt sledgehammer to the problem is however deeply flawed.
Anyway this article is really about supporting the idea of removing corroboration - here is a thought or two.
Your teenager comes home from working in the local shop. Two hours later the police arrive and arrest them, taking them into custody. The shop-owner has accused them of theft of the takings. There is no recovery of money from your child. There are no witnesses to support the money was ever taken. Perhaps the shopkeeper is on an insurance scam. Never mind it is his word versus your child. An apparently hard-working benevolent employer's say-so versus your sullen, clumsy, awkward, unfashionable teenager. Good luck with that - bye bye independent safeguards.
Your son comes home from a party. Three weeks later he is arrested for rape. There is no forensic support for this. There are no eye witnesses. There are no other witnesses even to put them together. The rape has only just been reported. Your son does not even know the person but was at the party. Well it's his word versus hers. No need now for corroboration. Hope your son comes across well at court. Good luck. Worse than that the girl is a known troublemaker. Regularly drinking too much. Your son on the other hand is quiet and has never been in bother. Re-assuring to know that not only is it her word versus his-we have created section 274 of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995 to stop this information about her coming out. (Unless you can perform the mental gymnastics laid down by section 275. Little chance).
What will these reformers tackle after they have abolished corroboration? And they will you know. Most people think the abolition of these safeguards won't affect them. It's a rogues’ charter. Just wait till it's you or a family member. Surely the next target is the presumption of innocence...hmmm quaint 16th century idea, same vintage as that nonsense corroboration that we used to have.....how to float this..... Let me see "Why shouldn't the Crown have an even playing field? Presumptions are flawed ideas in the best of circs"- yes that might work.
11 July 2012: Client acquitted despite confession in fire-raising case
Fire-raising is one of the most serious crimes that a court deals with: it involves real danger to life and extensive material costs in terms of damage to property and livelihoods. A confession to such a crime and a conviction would, in the normal course of events, result in a severe sentence.
In a case before Falkirk Sheriff Court, MTM acted for a client who had previously confessed when charged with setting fire to a farm building that had been completely destroyed. It meant that MTM's Solicitor-Advocate had to make highly detailed submissions to the Sheriff about the law of evidence relating to confessions. We were able to secure the client's acquittal on the basis that his confession did not contain "special knowledge" of the crime for there to be corroboration of the charge.
The client was acquitted on the basis of a No Case to Answer submission. MTM's thorough knowledge of the law, painstaking research and tenacious advocacy won through to get a result in a highly challenging case.
9 July 2012: Driving licence and livelihood saved as MTM uncovers insurance error in prosecution case
In a second private client Road Traffic case and on the same day, MTM represented a council support worker charged with driving without insurance under Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. It was a charge for which the client already had a previous conviction. He approached MTM as his work depended on his ability to drive and he would have lost his job if he had been convicted and lost his driving licence. Once again, out of court investigation by MTM was to prove decisive.
Although the police officers who investigated our client had information from the police database that he was insured, our investigations were able to confirm that a mistake had been made by the police. We obtained documentation to confirm that, in the circumstances of this case, he was in fact insured. Our client retained his licence and his employment.
This was another case in which we were able to persuade the Procurator Fiscal to desert the case against our client. Disqualification from driving would have been an inevitable result if the client had been convicted.
Out of court investigation again saved the day for the client, but the case also illustrated the importance of seeking legal advice IMMEDIATELY where there is any dubiety about insurance status. MTM can work behind the scenes to secure an acquittal as opposed to clients simply pleading guilty or being convicted at trial and facing far-reaching consequences for themselves and their families.
9 July 2012: MTM investigation leads to charges being dropped by the prosecution in private client Road Traffic case
Detailed on-the-ground investigation by MTM has led to a Road Traffic case against a private client being dropped by the prosecution.
The client, a taxi driver, had been charged with careless driving under Section 3 of the Road Traffic Act 1988. He was at risk of losing his employment if he was convicted of injuring a pedestrian.
MTM conducted a thorough investigation of the case which included visiting the locus (the place where the event took place) and obtaining maps and photographs of the locus to compare with information given by the Crown witnesses in their statement.
The investigation revealed a number of discrepancies in the evidence of the Crown witnesses, as contained in their statements. We were able to persuade the Procurator Fiscal that there was no prospect of a conviction against our client and the case was therefore dropped.
This Road Traffic case was a prime example of the effectiveness of a forensic approach to evidence, securing a result where someone’s livelihood was on the line.
27 June 2012: Road Traffic Appeal improves on result for client
MTM's expertise in appeal cases was once again to the fore when one of the firm’s Solicitor-Advocates identified a point of appeal in a case at Falkirk Sheriff Court.
The case, which went to the Appeal Court this month, was seen as being of legal importance and was therefore adjourned from a bench of two judges to be dealt with by a bench of three judges, which would provide a more authoritative decision. The Sheriff had failed to allow the client a discount in the period of her disqualification in the original road traffic case, even though she had pled guilty to the charge at the first opportunity.
At the Court of Criminal Appeal, we argued that our client should have been allowed a full one third discount in the period of her disqualification because of the stage at which she pled guilty to the charge, which was the pleading diet. The Crown opposed her appeal.
Nevertheless, as a result of legal research and submissions in this case, MTM saw things through and was able to persuade the Appeal Court to reduce the period of 4 years disqualification to only 3 years. That period could be reduced further to 2½ years in the event that our client successfully completed the drink driving rehabilitation scheme. Even though the Sheriff had disposed of the original case, MTM was still able to get a better result for the client by targeting novel and complex legal issues and arguing them in court.
24 May 2012: MTM wins six-day Sheriff and Jury trial on two serious assault charges
In a demanding case, involving a Sheriff and Jury trial lasting six days at Livingston Sheriff Court, one of our Solicitor Advocates was able to secure the acquittal of our client on two very serious charges of assault to severe injury, permanent disfigurement, permanent impairment and danger of life.
Drawing extensively on statements made by witnesses to the police, which contrasted with their evidence in Court, our Solicitor Advocates demonstrated to the Jury that these witnesses were not credible and their evidence could not be relied on. The client was acquitted of one of the charges on a ‘no case to answer’ submission that there was insufficient evidence in law to convict him of the charge. In relation to the other charge the Jury were persuaded after the six-day trial to acquit him of that charge.
It was a very serious case because the injuries to one of the alleged victims involved a major fracture to his ankle, which has left him with permanent damage.
11 May 2012: Acquittal secured in serious drugs case involving charges of supply of controlled drugs
At Stirling Sheriff Court, MTM secured a client’s acquittal relating to two charges under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, Section 4(3)(b), for being concerned in the supply of controlled drugs.
At the Sheriff and Jury trial, we were able to persuade the Procurator Fiscal to reduce these very serious charges to a simple charge of being in possession of the controlled drug, and the client was simply given a small fine. Careful negotiation with the Procurator Fiscal behind the scenes led to the best possible result for our client. The outcome demonstrates that not all cases require us to go to trial to have cases against a client reduced from a very serious level down to a low level.
25 April 2012: Prosecution discontinued in Sheriff and Jury trial
A client of MTM was acquitted after a Sheriff and Jury Trial of a charge of forcing his way into a house wearing a balaclava and wielding a weapon. The case was obviously a very serious case indeed and a very frightening experience for the alleged victim. However, detailed preparation of the client’s defence and expert presentation of his case at the trial led to the prosecutor being persuaded to discontinue the prosecution against him mid-trial.
20 April 2012: Skilful defence wins road traffic case - despite insurance company claim to have cancelled insurance
Most people pay their insurance premiums by direct debit. This seemingly straightforward arrangement can, however, often lead to a real insurance problem – and a serious legal charge: that of driving without insurance under Section 143 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
If funds are not available in a person’s bank account, and the direct debit is re-presented but is not paid, a letter is sent to the insured person advising that insurance cover has been withdrawn. This is a pretty regular occurrence.
MTM has defended a client in exactly these circumstances. The client, a successful businessman, was stopped by the police as part of a routine check and advised that he had no insurance cover for driving his vehicle. He insisted that he had valid insurance. However, subsequent investigations revealed a claim on the part of the insurance company that they had written to cancel the insurance some months previously on the grounds of unpaid premiums. Our client, who had been with the insurance company for seven years, vigorously denied having received any such letter.
The legal position is that insurance companies can withdraw cover without having to actually prove that they made contact with an insured person. The case proceeded to trial on the basis outlined above, and the client was delighted when MTM succeeded in persuading the Justice of the Peace to find him not guilty of the charge of driving without insurance.
Anyone accused of driving without insurance should contact MTM immediately. We will be pleased to advise and represent them in this highly specialist area of law and legal defence.
4 April 2012: Client acquitted of serious charge of assault to severe injury and permanent disfigurement
After a three-day Sheriff and Jury Trial in Alloa, a client of MTM was acquitted of a very serious charge of assault to severe injury and permanent disfigurement, of slashing the complainer with a knife across the face, whereby the complainer received serious injury.
Having spent nearly four months in custody, the client was delighted to be exonerated of this very serious charge and be able to walk away a free man and return to his family.
16 March 2012: MTM secures acquittal on serious charges and secures special arrangements for vulnerable witness
One of our clients, together with three other people, was charged with assault to severe injury, permanent disfigurement, permanent impairment and danger of life. The injuries to the complainer were exceptionally serious in that he now suffers from permanent hearing loss and other permanent injuries.
After a four-day Sheriff and Jury trial, MTM was able to secure the client’s acquittal on all of the serious aspects of the charge, reducing them to only a very simple assault to injury. The reduction led to him being required to undertake a short period of unpaid work. By contrast two of the co-accused were convicted, and one of them was sentenced to a seven-year extended sentence. It all goes to show how serious a case this was for the client and how different the outcomes were for those involved.
The case was remarkable too in another way in that we were able to convince the Sheriff that our client would be a ‘vulnerable witness’ when he gave evidence in the trial, under Section 271F of the Criminal Procedure (Scotland) Act 1995. This is highly unusual, and perhaps one of the first examples of its kind in Scotland. At a legal debate we were able to persuade the Sheriff to grant our application for our client to be allowed to give his evidence by CCTV link from a separate room in the Court building, because of serious and prolonged intimidation of him by the other co-accused in the case.
1 March 2012: Expert preparation wins High Court case
A three week trial at the High Court in Glasgow, relating to a very serious firearms, abduction and serious assault case, has ended in an MTM client being acquitted of all charges on the Indictment. Our client’s two co-accused were convicted and can now each expect to receive sentences of many years imprisonment.
MTM prepared a detailed defence over many months, which involved enlisting the services of one of Scotland’s leading QCs and instructing expert witnesses – experts we called on included a mobile telephone analyst, an experienced firearms expert and a professor of medicine. It was this careful preparation and legal representation which led to the successful outcome for our client.
13 February 2012: MTM keeps training on course
Training and staying abreast of the latest thinking in the profession are at the heart of our approach to the law; it applies to everyone we employ and whatever their level of experience.
MTM Director Neil Hay recently attended a Law Society conference about giving advice to suspects at a police station and the latest legal developments following on from the Cadder case. The firm was one of the first to spot the enormous legal implications for Cadder of a ruling in a case (Salduz) in the European Court of Human Rights, where a person had been questioned by the police without having a lawyer present.
7 February 2012: MTM helps client in the High Court to avoid prospect of a 6 - 7 year prison sentence
High Court trials involve some of the most serious and challenging cases that we deal with at MTM. A client has been found not guilty of assault and robbery of a shopkeeper after a High Court trial in which one of our solicitor-advocates mounted a compelling and successful defence. The case for the defence was founded on extensive and detailed preparation and research, which was carried out by MTM over a period of almost a year leading up to the trial.
Had the client been convicted, he would have faced a prison sentence of 6 - 7 years. That’s a daunting prospect for anyone. Thanks to MTM’s careful work in and out of court, the client was, to his great relief, able to walk away a free man.
31 January 2012: MTM client found not guilty of failing to provide a specimen of breath
A client in a road traffic case has been found not guilty of a charge of failing to provide a specimen of breath to the police at a police station, in terms of Section 7 of the Road Traffic Act 1988.
The client was from Poland and spoke poor English. Critically, the MTM lawyer was able to persuade the Sheriff at the trial that the client had not fully understood the instructions given to him by police officers at the police station, in order for him to provide a specimen of breath. The client was acquitted of the charge.
26 January 2012: Exceptional Hardship Proof saves postman’s livelihood in road traffic case
MTM has successfully defended a client using an Exceptional Hardship Proof. We were able to save the driving licence of a postman who made deliveries in a van. Careful research and preparation, involving information gathered from his employer, was presented by MTM to demonstrate that he was very likely to lose his job if he lost his driving licence.
Skilled presentation by MTM’s lawyers meant that we were able to persuade the Judge that exceptional hardship would be caused to the client’s family if he lost his job. We outlined and substantiated our case which was based on the argument that he would be unable to support his family and that they would likely incur debt and have to move house. The consequences were demonstrated so compellingly, and with respect to other members of his family, that our defence was accepted.
20 January 2012: Exceptional Hardship Proof saves senior executive’s licence
A senior executive of a UK company with a requirement to attend business meetings across Scotland and the North of England has retained his driving licence thanks to an Exceptional Hardship Proof presented by MTM Defence Lawyers.
We were able to persuade the judge that the client would be likely to lose his job or be downgraded in his job in the event that he lost his driving licence, which was essential for him to be able to carry out his role within the company. Careful preparation meant that we were able to obtain and then present information regarding his family circumstances, particularly relating to the care of a member of his family who was unwell. Again, skilful advocacy helped to persuade the Court that this was a case where the client should not be disqualified from driving.
16 January 2012: Acquittals in the same Court at two separate Jury trials for serious crimes of violence cases
Two Jury trials in the same Court have resulted in acquittals for each client. Each was charged with very serious crimes of violence, and one additionally with a charge involving a severe injury, causing permanent disfigurement to the face of the alleged victim. Had they not been acquitted, they would almost certainly have been sentenced to long custodial sentences.
11 January 2012: MTM argues successfully against three prosecution witnesses in usual road traffic case – client acquitted of dangerous driving and an alternative charge
MTM has successfully defended a client against a charge of dangerous driving under Section 2 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and an alternative charge of culpable and reckless conduct. The prosecution decided to charge the client with the additional alternative offence because, although the Crown was sure that the client’s conduct was criminal in nature, the prosecutor could not be sure which of the two offences he had committed. The charge stated that our client had driven off his vehicle at a time when a person opened the door and was trying to enter the vehicle, causing them to fall out of the vehicle onto the ground, suffering a substantial number of injuries
After a trial involving cross examination of three witnesses against the client an MTM lawyer was able to persuade the Sheriff that all three of the witnesses’ evidence was unreliable and the client was acquitted of both charges.
11 January 2012: MTM contests poor quality of evidence in assault case
The prosecutor in an assault case against an MTM client has discontinued the prosecution in the middle of a trial. The case involved a client accused of causing injury by punching a person who then fell over, striking their head on a television stand, suffering a serious injury to the back of their head. MTM was successful in demonstrating the poor quality of the prosecution evidence against the client, who was found not guilty after the case was dropped.