Lie for an easier life than fight for what you believe.

[sweetnsexyenglish]

I require some advice.

 

My son was stupid and in a rash decision snatched a another child's phone. He admitted to the crime and his and the child's accounts matched up exactly but for one point and my son does not disputed this fact. However the child states a knife was used, no knife was ever searched for even when the police came to my home they casually asked but never searched and the prosecution chose to build the case on the boys word against my son's with no visual evidence other than yes my son admitted to snatching the phone and running off.

 

I would like to make this clear that I am not a mother who just believe's because this is my child and I want to believe. My child is very much aware they did wrong and was remorseful however at no time at all does my child admit to having a weapon, is not a violent child has never been in trouble before with the police, and had no previous criminal record or affiliations.

 

We obtained a solicitor only after admitting to the theft based on the child was stating a knife was used and my son was adamant there was not. During the course of the months that passed I can count on one hand how many times the solicitor had wanted to see my son. Never having ever had any dealing with a solicitor other than for a divorce I believed all was well however the evening before his trial the solicitor says that he intended to request a good year indication and I should talk this over with my son which I did and advised him only take this route if you know in your heart you had a knife. My son maintained he did not. On the morning of the trial again we discussed this and my son being adamant of his innocence was willing to fight for what he knew to be the truth. That yes he snatched the child's phone but he never had a weapon.

 

During the course of the day awaiting his chance to go into court it appears that the solicitors main objective was to give advice on how strong the prosecutions case was, when there was only the evidence of the boys word against my sons. No weapon was ever searched for and even in the testimony the boys first words were by the solicitors admission was that the boy "thought" he had a knife" and the description of the knife given was "a silver blade half a pens length he thinks was a kitchen knife". This is the strong prosecution argument. He even told my son that the jury would view since my son already admitted to theft that they might consider that the boy was telling the truth about the knife also and painted the picture that the minimum my son would get if found guilty was 3 years. 3 years to a boy that's just turned 16 is frightening...I understand the solicitor has an obligation to warn of the pitfalls if found guilty however I also believe as a solicitor if taken on board to defend a client should be believing in that client rather than filling them with all the negatives of if they lose.

 

My son was still willing to go to trial for the truth. This crime took place when my son was 15 and prosecution was insistent for this to be heard at Crown Court. Up to the last second my son was ready for a trial till the solicitor asked about the bus my son said he got off, and because prosecution state there was no bus stop. However since my son had got off the bus because he realised he was on the wrong bus when I pulled up a map and we could not find the bus stop though he was sure where he had been, the solicitor then planted the seed that how can his credibility be trusted when there is not even a bus stop.

 

I have since asked google to produce all the bus stops in the area for the route my son was on and low and behold my son WAS telling the truth unfortunately there is no visual stand. Too little to late with the proper search and not under a rush we could have resolved this minor point about no bus stop but we will never resolve the point that a child told a lie on himself to admit to something he knew in his heart was untrue and in tears told me as long as he and I knew the truth. The point being he was willing to make the sacrifice as long as I believed him was all that mattered to him since it was evident his own solicitor didn't appear to. Faced with all the negativity the solicitor gave him especially since the prosecution chose to deny there was a bus stop the man that was suppose to defend my child showed my child it is better to plead guilty to something you haven't done than stand by your convictions since his own solicitor didnt make my son feel at all on the day of his trial that he was there to defend my son.

 

I am heart broken that my son would lie for an easier life than fight for the truth based on the advice of his solicitor but what can I do. People are saying it is better this since the Good Year indication from the judge was that my son would do NO custodial sentence, but the principle of the matter that my family and I believe is why admit to something you haven't done, had his solicitor even gave him the confidence that he was there to argue my child's innocence that he has never and does never carry a weapon, and that this was his first offence he has no previous or criminal record, it was in a moment of anger at seeing an item very similar to what I had confiscated and having been angry at me that very morning for being a parent and doing what we parents do best which is complain and reprimand he made a stupid error of judgment.

 

But should that error in judgement have meant he be advised in this way? The solicitor had never attempted before the trial to obtain any form of character references on my sons behalf, it was me that obtained them the morning of the trial based on the advice of a friend after I indicated the information the solicitor had chosen to give the night before the trial and feel had he made this indication months ago I would have found another solicitor way back before the trial who was willing to fight to defend my child.

[steampowered]

Very sorry to hear about that, it must be a very difficult time for you and your family. What advice do you need?

[sweetnsexyenglish]

I don't feel that the solicitor represented or advised my son with his best interests or made my son feel that he was there to represent him. Unfortunately after speaking with some parents I have since been told once I mention the solicitors practice name that this particular set of solicitors are only interested in the money, not whether or not the person is actually guilty or innocent. As a parent what can I do where is the best place to look in obtaining a solicitor to help my son, never had to go through this before and the solicitor I used was recommended by his Mentor.

 

Many have advised that my son should never have accepted a plea of guilty if he knew he wasn't but as a child you can understand why based on the facts I explained. Other than making a complaint...I have been told he can change his plea but I am struggling with the sea of solicitors to know who to go to and trust or is it too late in the day. Although they are planing to do a presentencing report before sentencing.

[steampowered]

I'm not a criminal lawyer, but I would assume that a solicitor only in it for the money would advise all their clients to plead not guilty to get the money for representing them at trial.

 

Has the plea actually been entered, and/or a punishment actually decided?

[sweetnsexyenglish]

The solicitor requested a good year indication (i think thats what its called) and the judge stated he would not look at giving my son any custodial sentence, however a pre sentencing report has yet to be done before sentencing. I feel strongly about the fact it is offered on the basis he pleads guilty to something my son definitely refutes having or being in possession of. Guilt is guilt and he has and does accept responsibility to what he did but I am very much at odds with making a child feel their only option is to admit to something they know to be untrue.

[steampowered]

Has the plea of guilty been formally entered or not?

 

If yes, not much can be done.

If no, then I don't see why your son can't change his plea to not guilty. Of course the implications of this would need to be carefully thought through.

 

If the plea has not been formally made and you are not happy with your solicitor, could you sack him and use another?

[sweetnsexyenglish]

Hi and sorry had to go out, and I believe so as this was what his solicitor was pushing for all along than being prepared to fight my son's case on the convictions he maintained, however he still has to return for sentencing and would rather see if he could change his solicitor and get advice before attending and whether he can actually appeal on the grounds that I dnt believe the solicitor acted on his behalf

[BazzaS]

You cannot appeal against conviction once a guilty plea has been sentenced except in the most extreme of circumstances.

You can apply to withdraw a guilty plea providing sentencing has not taken place, but applying does not mean the application will be accepted.

 

You (and your son ) should consider obtaining legal advice from a solicitor who you trust, urgently.

By all means seek advice here, but this isn't for the amateur (like me) : get it wrong and an application to withdraw the plea may well get rejected. Fail to apply before sentencing and the option disappears.

Time is of the essence.

[Riz0]

Go with BazzaS's advice and speak to a different solicitor if you do not trust your current one. A change in solicitor, change in plea and a plausible explanation as to why the guilty plea was initially entered (along with clear evidence that your son maintained his innocence prior to entering a plea) *may* just about convince a judge that no adverse inferences should be made or that the jury in any eventual trial shouldn't be allowed to know this.

 

Seek specialist advice. Not trying to be rude or anything but this isn't the right place for it.

 

If you don't mind me asking - what area of the country are you from? I may be able to recommend someone.

 

For what it is worth, I think something like this is definitely worth fighting. The consequences can go wrong, absolutely and I don't treat that lightly. But that said - I speak from very personal experience when I say if it isn't fought now, no amount of pleading will later convince people in your son's life that he wasn't guilty of the alleged crime. A lot of people nowadays take the view that kids will do wrong etc and that people change, but a lot of employers and educational establishments don't take chances.

 

"My solicitor told me to plead guilty" just won't convince a lot of people.

 

All the best and I hope your son comes out of this with the right result.

 

Riz

[BazzaS]

A change in solicitor, change in plea and a plausible explanation as to why the guilty plea was initially entered (along with clear evidence that your son maintained his innocence prior to entering a plea) *may* just about convince a judge that no adverse inferences should be made or that the jury in any eventual trial shouldn't be allowed to know this.

 

Just for info, no jury in a youth court.

 

A jury would only feature if passed from youth court to Crown Court (is the charge against your son Burglary which might be passed upwards?)

[Riz0]

Just for info, no jury in a youth court.

 

A jury would only feature if passed from youth court to Crown Court (is the charge against your son Burglary which might be passed upwards?)

 

Apologies. I see. I wasn't aware of that, but they would have a report from a youth worker before sentencing if I am not mistaken? And if the OP's son has a decent background except this incident, that should go in his favour. I just thought I read something in the first post about the CPS "insisting on taking it to the crown court".

 

Out of curiosity OP - how quickly did your son admit to taking the phone? was it straight away? This may help if he has admitted to taking the phone straight away but not mentioned anything about a knife. The victim's witness statement does appear to be vague and confusing from what you have said.

[Guest]

pre sentence reports involve the probation service, not a 'youth worker' as such.

wasn't it robbery (rather than burglary)? where was the guilty plea entered, mags or crown court. is it at the crown court for sentence?

Edited November 9, 2013 by Ford

[sweetnsexyenglish]

To respond to all, Prosecution pushed for it to be held at Crown Court even though he was only 15 based on the fact that HAD he been an adult he'd be looking at a minimum of 6yrs. When it first went to crown for a date the judge was unimpressed with the fact they brought a child to crown court. So yes a trial will involve a jury.

 

Riz0 & BazzaS much appreciated he hasn't been sentenced yet he has to have a pre-sentencing report done first but WILL seek advice as I was told it was for the solicitor to have had character references in his pack, none were present, and he did maintain innocence and wanted a trial all the way through up until the solicitor then started talking about his credibility we were there hours and from the time this was first made clear of what the child was saying at no point up to and even after going to court...my son still remains a hundred percent sure of his convictions BUT since the prosecution claimed there was no bus stop where my son said he got off... ((But a google map and friends of mine already confirmed there is unfortunately the lack of a sign on the map used, to a child))....if he cant even prove he got off where he did what chance does he stand when even his own solicitor doesn't obvious have the correct mind to fight for him....one child's word against another does not make strong evidence.

 

I am going to make some calls on monday but thank you all for the advice.

[sweetnsexyenglish]

The day the police came to my home, being a strict parent I left my son at the station 15 hrs, and as soon as I got there I was in the room less than 5 mins and he told me the truth...he then was interviewed and told the police...no it is not burglary...he took a phone from another child as in snatch and run however the child is trying to say he had a knife, however my child does not walk with a knife and this incident took place on his way to school. The reason they solicitor says they don't NEED to produce a knife is because he "could have thrown it away" my son is NOT that smart...he was stupid enough to snatch the phone and put his chip into the phone and THIS is how the police tracked him, had he half a brain or been a seasoned pro he would have sold the phone....they give him too much smarts for ditching a knife but dnt see the stupidity used in the theft...and I say this as his mother. Every detail of what took place matches what the boy says but what doesn't make sense....the child said my son pulled a knife that my son took the phone, that the child gave chase...the child is younger than my son and roughly estimated my son's age...their stories match up for the chase and how they both got tired and out of breath and how my son told the child, stop chasing me...then the child runs to school tells his teacher he was robbed at knife point and he is petrified???? yet he chased an older boy till they BOTH ran out of breath?

 

 

As a parent you teach your child if someone has a weapon give them what they want run the opposite direction SCREAM for help....so why would the child chase an older child knowing full well HE said my son threatened him with a knife.....and claimed he was petrified???

[Guest]

ok

so, was entered at crown court?

theft with 'force' is robbery which is an indictable offence, hence maybe why to crown court subsequently despite a 'youth'. 'snatching' is usually regarded as enough force for the offence of robbery. following a guilty plea (or conviction), the issue of extent of force used is usually taken into account re sentencing. what did son plead guilty to? s8 theft act?

as others say, seek further legal advice.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Ford

[sweetnsexyenglish]

Again can I highlight there was no force and we were 1st advised it was theft from a person since at no time did he touch the person but snatched the phone...even the police officer explained the difference in taking an item (snatching) and forcibly taking the item (robbery).... Also explained in previous messages what happened and why..."Up to the last second my son was ready for a trial till the solicitor asked about the bus my son said he got off, and because prosecution state there was no bus stop. However since my son had got off the bus because he realised he was on the wrong bus when I pulled up a map and we could not find the bus stop though he was sure where he had been, the solicitor then planted the seed that how can his credibility be trusted when there is not even a bus stop. " "if he cant even prove he got off where he did what chance does he stand when even his own solicitor doesn't obvious have the correct mind to fight for him" therefore he took the solicitor's advice but this solicitor had be pushing this from the night before the trial....which to me says he never came to fight my son's case as he had months to even suggest this was the route he planned to take and at no point did my son ever say he didn't want to go to trial, my son never said he used a weapon and always states there was NO weapon, even when interviewed by police when questioned. it is one child's word against another no evidence other than what the child says but based on the child's word the police choose to go for robbery but dnt feel they needed to produce the weapon? Even when they asked IF I had a knife missing the description of the knife is vague....they never even bothered to look at my knives....the boy's statement says...he thinks was a knife...then later on he said a silver blade half a pens length he thinks is a kitchen knife.... the smallest knife I have is distinctive....had it been the knife or had police had enough of a description i am sure they could have selected it but they didn't even look.

[Guest]

from what you have said, there does seem to be 'force' as legally defined. as i mentioned, 'snatching' can constitute robbery eg snatching someones handbag is usually regarded as 'force' re robbery (no need for touching). same thing. if you are unsure on that look up the case law on it.

as i asked, what charge did your son plead guilty to? s8?

no offence to the police, but is generally up to the cps whether to prosecute or not. and then what transpires at court.

the police didn't choose to go for robbery? the cps did. the cps decide whether to prosecute or not, and if so on what grounds.

also, as mentioned, once 'force' is established with the theft either by guilty plea or after trial, then it would robbery. then the amount/type of force used will be considered re sentencing.

am not judging. just pointing out the general facts.

do get further legal advice.

Edited November 10, 2013 by Ford