JJ was charged with a public order offence. Prior to his police interview, his legal representative was given an assurance that if JJ were to make admissions to the offence, he would receive a caution, being a person of previous good character. JJ’s legal representative advised him to make admissions during the interview so as to be eligible for a caution. However, despite this, the police later went back on their assurance and proceeded to charge JJ with a public order offence.

As a result, JJ’s case was set down for an application to stay for an abuse of process. During a lengthy hearing, evidence was given by both JJ’s legal representative and two police officers. The Court found, contrary to the officer's evidence, that JJ’s legal representative had, in fact, received a clear assurance that JJ would receive a caution, provided he made admissions. Consequently, the Court ruled that prosecuting JJ under these circumstances constituted an abuse of process. The proceedings against him were therefore stayed.

In arguing that JJ’s continued prosecution was an abuse of process, his solicitor relied on the case of DPP v Mansfield, a case handled by GT Stewart at the High Court in 2021. That ruling confirmed that prosecuting someone after promising a caution could amount to an abuse of process.

JJ was represented in his police interview by Nicole Windele, an accredited police station representative from our Croydon office, and Jessica Gosling, a supervising solicitor from our Bromley office.