Summary
Our youth client was riding in a car with four adult co-defendants, when the Police performed a stop and search of the vehicle. The Police found the other passengers to be in possession of cannabis and drug paraphernalia. Our client was also later charged with being concerned with the supply of cannabis, to which he pleaded not guilty. During the case preparation phase, our team of Youth specialists made several arguments and accommodations for our client to ensure he was treated fairly throughout proceedings. When the case was heard at Luton Youth Court, the Prosecution offered no evidence and the charges against our client were dropped.
Details and Plea Submission
The co-defendant’s car was stop and searched by the Police, where amounts of cannabis, cocaine and drug paraphernalia were found. No drugs or paraphernalia were found on our client; however, he was regardless arrested on suspicion of supplying cannabis.
When at the Police Station, our client provided a prepared statement where he denied any knowledge of the drugs and stated that he did not supply drugs. He later pleaded not guilty to one charge of being concerned with the supply of cannabis.
Initially, our client was made to appear in the adult court due to his association with the adult co-defendants. Legal Executive Nicola Hobdell made a strong argument that it was in the interests of justice for our client to be ‘severed’ from the adults so that his case could be dealt with in the Youth Court, while the co-defendants were sent to the Crown Court for trial. In keeping his case in the Youth Court, more accommodations could be made for him, in-keeping with his age and maturity levels in comparison to his co-defendants.
Solicitor Samantha Harmer, a specialist in youth offences, represented our client later on this matter. After entering his not guilty plea, the Prosecution provided further evidence from our client’s phone against him, which suggested engagement in low level cannabis supply. Despite this, he maintained that he was not involved in any large-scale drug supply and that the messages were from several years ago prior when he was still a user of cannabis himself.
Our Defence
At the time of the alleged offence, our client was fifteen and was the only youth among four other co-defendants. Now seventeen, our client stated that he was surrounded by the wrong crowd and had no knowledge of the scale of any drugs organisation carried out by the other co-defendants. Our client was honest about being a user of cannabis at the time and we therefore had to ascertain within the evidence provided what the Prosecution suggested was our client supplying cannabis rather than him simply using himself.
Samantha prepared thorough mitigation ahead of our client’s trial, outlining the improvements that our client had made in the two years since the alleged offence. During this time, our client had been completing a Youth Referral Order in relation to another offence. He had been engaging well with this order and had completed various courses, including a drug-related course due to his own personal use.
Our team also identified that our client needed an intermediary, who was able to assist our client at Court to ensure that he understood everything and was able to follow proceedings to the best of his ability. Being able to identify the individual needs of clients, especially youth clients, and the ability to work with third parties is important to ensure that each person receives fair treatment at Court.
Trial at Luton Youth Court
The case was heard at Luton Youth Court where our client was represented by Niamh Quille of 9BR Chambers. On the day of the trial, the Prosecution applied to adjourn the trial as the Prosecution had failed to obtain a copy of the phone evidence. Niamh strongly opposed this adjournment as it was not in the interests of justice to adjourn the case, considering that the supply of cannabis was factually denied and that our team had made no fault, making clear from the outset that the phone evidence was imperative to the case.
The Judge ultimately refused the application to adjourn the trial, agreeing that the disclosure failing was a fundamental mistake that should not have happened. As a result, the Prosecution offered no evidence against our client, and he was acquitted of the charge.
Our client was extremely grateful to Samantha, Nicola and Niamh for their continued support and to be able to put this period behind him, considering that it had taken over two years to finally conclude matters. This case highlights the importance of securing specialist legal representation. Without our team’s expertise in youth matters and our experience with identifying needs for intermediaries, the outcome of our client’s case could have been very different.
Looking for a specialist youth solicitor?
We understand how serious it is when a child is facing a criminal charge and the effect this can have on their future. At Lawtons, we have an experienced team of youth specialists who are experienced in defending children on criminal matters. If a child has been arrested, reach out to us today and let us help guide you through the process. Call us on 0333 577 0522 or visit our enquiries page.
