We represented our client who was charged with assault by beating. Following careful cross-examination of the complainant and the arresting officer at trial we secured our client’s acquittal after a successful no case to answer submission.
Background
Following our client’s arrest, he was represented at the police station by Kandy Dawson, Consultant at GT Stewart, in her capacity as duty solicitor. He denied the offence and Kandy prepared a statement on his behalf. He was then charged and remanded overnight.
The next day he was produced from custody for his first appearance. He was represented by an agent on behalf of the firm. He entered a not guilty plea and bail was refused.
At our client’s second bail application, he was represented by Solicitor, Adam Iqbal, who successfully secured his release on conditional bail.
Following this, our client confirmed that he wished for Adam to represent him at trial.
The Allegation
It was alleged that, during an argument, our client assaulted the complainant and caused injury. The complainant further alleged that our client was intoxicated and prevented her from leaving the property.
Defence Approach
We reviewed all the evidence served by the prosecution, including the complainant’s statement, arresting officer’s statement, body‑worn video footage, photographs of injuries, and the 111 call made by the complainant to an NHS call handler.
During this call, the complainant set out the allegation and described her injuries to the NHS call handlers. The call handlers then became concerned when the situation escalated and the client began shouting. As a result, the NHS 111 call handlers contacted the police, who attended the address.
Significant inconsistencies were identified within the complainant’s account, particularly in relation to:
- Her recollection of events,
- Her level of alcohol consumption,
- Whether she was prevented from leaving and
- The cause of her injuries.
At trial, we carefully and sensitively cross‑examined the complainant on the discrepancies in her various accounts.
We also cross-examined the arresting officer who asserted that our client was intoxicated thereby undermining the reliability of the officer’s account.
Outcome
At the close of the prosecution case, we made submissions of no case to answer. The Magistrates accepted our submissions. They found the evidence was inconsistent and unreliable. They concluded that the prosecution had failed to discharge the burden of proof and therefore could not make the Court sure of our client’s guilt. The Court subsequently acquitted our client at half time.
Our client was represented by Solicitor Adam Iqbal.
