Assault emergency worker charge left to lie on file after representations

Sonn Macmillan Walker represented a vulnerable client who was charged with a single count of assaulting an emergency worker. It was said that during her detention by police in a traumatic situation,  she kicked one of the officers.

Our client denied intentionally or recklessly assaulting the officer. She entered a not guilty plea and her trial was listed to take place before Liverpool Crown Court. 

In our analysis of the evidence, we queried whether the level of restraint used by the officers was proportionate in the circumstances, especially given the trauma she had suffered previously at the hands of other men.  We noted that the officers had provided inconsistent statements about the evening, and that no other officers but for the complainant witnessed the alleged assault. We also noted that despite the number of officers attending, there was no body-worn footage of the alleged assault, and the minimal footage that had been served showed our client being calm and compliant.

We had significant concerns about our client’s mental health throughout the proceedings. We decided to instruct a psychologist to address what her mental vulnerabilities were, and how her symptoms may manifest, to ensure she could be properly supported. The psychologist confirmed that our client was extremely vulnerable, suffering from clinical anxiety and PTSD.

Once we had the psychological report, we made lengthy representations to the Crown requesting they reconsider the charging decision. We submitted firstly, given the inconsistencies in the evidence, that the evidential burden had not been met. Secondly, we argue that it was not in the public interest to prosecute our client.  We explained that she had recently been victim to a crime, the circumstances of this offending arose as a result of this crime. As such, she was particularly vulnerable, and the circumstances of the alleged offending were peculiar and would not re-occur. We submitted our psychological report, which confirmed the significant challenged our client was facing generally, and as a result of the ongoing stress of the proceedings.

In response to our representations, the Crown offered to accept a caution instead of continuing the proceedings. Our client was happy to accept a caution. This out-of-court disposal not only protected our client from the risk of a conviction or sentence, but also from the stress of attending Court, and re-living any of the trauma she had experienced.

Phoebe Coleman was the Solicitor with conduct of this case. Isabella Denn-White of 7 Harrington Street Chambers was instructed Counsel, providing support and insight throughout the case.