Our Expertise

Our main areas of expertise in defending against false allegations such as Miscarriage of Justice and Criminal Cases are divided into two basic categories; building a complete defence strategy for our client and assuring that the Barrister and/or Solicitors representing the client is representing them properly.

All cases that we deal with are concentrated around serious arrestable offences. To date we have dealt with over one hundred related cases to High Court level.

Many cases which result in a wrongful conviction are due to ineffectiveness of Counsel. Perhaps the Barrister and/or Solicitor(s) were not experienced enough in handling these matters efficiently. Obviously, it is in the best interest of any Accused to know whether or not they are being properly represented before they walk into the courtroom on the day their trial begins.

When we take on a case for a client, our obligation is strictly to them. Anything we determine during our investigation is reported directly to them and it is their choice to accept or ignore the matter.

There have been cases where we have quickly learned that the Barrister and/or Solicitor representing the client was far from adequate and reported that to the client. In some cases, the client has changed Barrister and/or Solicitor. Whereas in others they have remained with the same Counsel they had, only to discover that at trial they had made a mistake! With the risk factor in these cases being prison, there is absolutely no room for mistakes.

Our overall investigative goal in these types of cases is to provide absolute proof that the allegation is false and, hopefully, prevent a Prosecution. If successful we will have saved our client thousands of pounds and, a possible conviction.

In order to reach our final goal, it is first necessary to meet with the client and determine exactly what has been done for them in their defence. Have all the steps taken on their behalf been proper and adequate and, if not, why not?

Finally, what will it take to correct past defence mistakes, if any, and turn everything around for the client? This is no easy task and will not be accomplished by someone who is not experienced in the field, be it the Barrister, Solicitors, Consultant, Expert Witness or Detective. However, this is not possible to achieve overnight. Our expertise includes, but is not limited to:-

(1) Total pre-trial preparation.
(2) Witness preparation.
(3) Locating and interviewing expert witnesses.
(4) Arranging specific testing for the Accused.
(5) Working with children, even in cases where others have failed to reach them, to obtain the truth after they have made a false accusation.
(6) Scenes of crime recreation.

There is a definitive art to properly dealing with an accuser. We have devised a system which has yet to fail in the cases that we have been involved in to date. Following preparation, we "talk" to an accuser (where permitted). We do not "interview" them, nor do we obtain the information we seek through leading or suggestive questioning. Our interviews (which can be video taped), with the accusers are designed to provide the truth and not stress the accuser (subject to written authorisation by the interviewee).

In post-conviction matters, we analyse the total defence to identify any possibility of ineffective assistance of Counsel, Prosecutorial misconduct or any other factor which has resulted in the conviction. To work with the client in an attempt to have their conviction set aside.

From an investigative standpoint, often we view false allegations differently to many others, including most Barristers and Solicitors. Barristers and Solicitors specialise in "legal" defence tactics, where we, specialise in finding the truth and proving that the allegation is false. Any false allegation is a lie and without question, the most direct approach is to expose that lie.

There is, however, an art to "exposing" the lie. If this is not done properly, the "lie" will persevere and in many cases, conviction is inevitable. Exposing the "lie" can also be the solution to reversing a conviction. Even following a conviction, newly discovered evidence "proving" the allegation as a lie is, in itself, enough to justify filing for an appeal or re-trial. In such cases, once you have proven that the Prosecution's main witness has lied, in some cases, the prosecutor will retract all charges and the horror ends.

Please keep in mind that there are no shortcuts in these cases. We have listened to potential clients who have panicked and have gone off in a thousand directions preparing what they believed was their defence. We have also seen person(s) who have been charged, actually approach their accuser and quickly found themselves facing further charges of harassment. Preparing these cases for trial is not a joke. Get an expert. We pride ourselves in educating our clients to the point, where they plainly understand in simple terms, what is going on in their defence and in preparing our cases in such a manner as to, if at all possible, stop the prosecution before trial.

During the course of our defence preparation, depending on the circumstances and the client, we may recommend various tests by experts. These tests could range from the Polygraph, Forensic, and Psychological Evaluation, Depression Inventory, Sexual history and tests to determine various other factors related to the charges or indictments involved. It is our practice to meet with our client and prepare them for any testing i.e. polygraph, or otherwise. In any case where it is requested that the accused take a polygraph (Please note: that the results of this test are NOT admissible in Court in the United Kingdom). In these circumstances we always recommend a thorough pre-test. Polygraph tests cannot be used as evidence.

There have been cases where the defendant has taken, and very successfully passed a polygraph. However, they were told they had failed the examination when a non-expert administered it. On such occasions, after being told they had failed, we presented the report from the first test and after checking into it, the prosecutors decided not pursue the matter.

They could have gone forward in their attempt to obtain a conviction had the only test been by a non-expert, and the prosecutor had been told that the accused had failed. In this scenario it is vital to have the pre-test conducted by a professional, who is not afraid to stand by their results, especially when they have passed someone that a non-expert had failed.

You can still fail a polygraph and not be guilty. The polygraphs, along with many of these other tests, are psychological, and proper preparation can easily mean the difference of passing or failing.

One of our experts has been involved in polygraph testing for over twenty years.

Beware of the prosecutor who has no desire to determine the truth regarding guilt or innocence in any case. Their sole ambition is to convict. These self-righteous "professionals" use a conviction as a feather in their cap and, in many instances, a stepping stone for career gains. They may lie to the defence and the jury may well hide discovery when it benefits the defence and will do whatever else is necessary to achieve their goal. While it is true that these individuals will be judged for their actions one day, this is no consolation to the innocent party that they have just sent to prison in the name of "justice." These "Prosecutors" CAN be defeated, but only by the most seasoned professionals.

In our experience in dealing with these cases, we have had the good fortune to work with some excellent and caring Queen’s Counsel (Q.C.) (also known as a Silk), Barristers and Solicitors, as well as being exposed to several that were motivated solely by ego. On occasion, where ego has been apparent, we have even been constantly reminded that we are not a Barrister or Solicitor and, therefore, have no knowledge of the laws specific to a particular area.

One Solicitor recently told us that we had given him a tremendous amount of “information” and that it was now his job to turn it into evidence. We discussed with our Client what the Solicitor had said and she simply laughed and then said without information there can be no evidence. The fact that we had uncovered more information in the four month’s (in which we had been working on the case and due to our “information as ruled by the Court of Appeal the Appellant was released), than any Barrister, Solicitor or the Police involved with the case over a two year period, really didn’t matter, we will leave you to decide if it was information or evidence which we discovered!

The fact is, some Barristers and Solicitors feel threatened by anyone, especially a non- Barrister and or Solicitor, having any input into their case, regardless of the fact that they may have either very limited, or had absolutely no experience in this particular area. It is not unusual at all for Barristers and Solicitors to make the argument to the client that any outside party is not necessary.

On two prior occasions, we have had that happen to us after we had been retained to assist a client. The Solicitor convinced our client that paying us was an unnecessary expense and that there was nothing we could do that their paralegal could not. As a result, the client with the explanation terminated our services; "Sorry, but we have to do what he says," and "We just can't afford to make him mad at this point." On one of those two occasions, well after we had gone, we received emails from their family and friends, asking us to assist them in reversing the conviction, and apologising for discharging us when they did!

We might also add that each of the convictions resulted without question, because of ineffective assistance of Counsel. There simply was no defence and no real preparation for being hit with the unexpected at trial. The unexpected, in both cases was that the evidence not only came in perfectly, but the complainant also alleged additional allegations as well. Simply put, the accused never saw it coming and was not prepared. In one of the two cases, the accused did not give evidence, (based on the advice of his Barrister); it only took his jury less than 2 hours to reach their verdict … "Guilty".

The question is why would any Barrister or Solicitor desire to reject outside assistance, especially in these types of cases? In most instances the answer is simple. There are very few Barristers and Solicitors practicing today who specialise in these areas. The one’s who do are very expensive or are rarely available on Legal Aid, or may not be prepared to work for free.

As with any profession, the fact is, there are good and there are bad Barristers and Solicitors. We assure you, there is no greater pleasure in the world than assisting a concerned and caring Barrister and Solicitor in preparing a defence for someone falsely accused. These professionals do exist and it has been our pleasure to have worked with them. In every case, there are two sides; the legal side and the humane side. Granted, the legal side does deal with issues specific to every jurisdiction, the humane side, and dealing specifically with the evidence of the defendant and their witnesses. This remains constant in almost every case.

In trials specific to allegations of sexual abuse, the defence may have expert after expert lined up, telling the jury there was no physical evidence of abuse and that a child can lie. Even with issues as serious as being sexually abused but, when the smoke clears the jury are left with basically two issues; the credibility of the evidence of the complainant opposed to that of the defendant. Simply put, who is believable?

The evidence of the defendant must combat the complainant’s evidence, especially given the fact that many jury members may "side" with the complainant simply because the complainant is a child. In our general perception, as humans, we ask ourselves, "Why would any complainant lie about something as serious as being abused if it had not happened?" or "How could any child possibly have the sexual knowledge necessary to make the allegation if it was not true?" Without question, these issues must be resolved to the jury's satisfaction or a conviction is almost certain.

Never loose sight of the fact that any jury begins this type of trial case with only the knowledge contained in the individual indictments! The Prosecutor tells them they expect the evidence to prove that the defendant did commit the offence(s) in question. At that point they depend on the fact that each individual jury member will be closely watching every action of the defendant very closely. While there may be no profile or characteristics of a person who may commit the said offences, they depend on the fact that jury members will try to determine, in their own minds, whether the defendant "fits" their perception of what such an offender would be. Also great deal of the defence will rest with the Barristers ability to properly question that complainant whilst they are on the witness stand. This is simply human nature.

In most cases, as previously stated, a jury may not acquit, unless the defendant gives evidence and, obviously, unless they believe the defendant has more credibility than that of the complainant. Put yourself in the place of any jury member. You are trying to determine if a defendant is guilty, you hear the complainant tell you that (for example), the defendant sexually molested them. The defendant does not give his or her evidence and simply denies the allegations. Would you acquit, or would you think that the defendant was afraid to give evidence, was hiding something or perhaps actually was guilty?

Never loose sight of the fact that these cases are very different than any other criminal case! The defendant may well get by in not giving evidence in a burglary case. However, in these cases, there is usually minimal evidence and again, everything will usually come down to the word of the complainant against that of the defendant.
If the defendant is properly prepared hopefully, they will avoid pitfalls, old or new, which might give the jury a reason to believe that they are guilty; simply based on responses they provide during their own evidence. The evidence of the defendant could easily make the difference between freedom and prison. It certainly is not something anyone should gamble with, nor something that any defendant should take lightly.

In a number of the cases which we have been retained on following a conviction, we have learned that the entire pre-trial preparation of the defendant consisted of, "tell the truth and you will do fine." The fact is, honestly preparing a witness takes time and effort. When we have been involved, we have carefully worked with our client, going over every possible aspect of the case, step by step, until they are able to respond to any questions or issues properly and without hesitation. Obviously, that approach has proven successful, especially when we have watched juries acquit our clients on all charges, even where there have been numerous indictments.

Preparing a witness is very important, yet seldom is given any major importance. You do not survive a trial by "shooting from the hip." You survive by preparing a perfect defence and ensuring that anyone who is giving evidence on behalf of the defence has been properly prepared to do so.

The greatest fear of many of those whom have been falsely accused is the fear that they will not be absolutely perfect when giving their evidence. The fact is, no one is perfect and everyone makes mistakes. However, by gaining a thorough knowledge of all issues specific to the allegations through continuous discussion, the Accused will certainly be more prepared to avoid potential prosecution "tricks" and "traps."

There is nothing neither at all magical nor indeed mysterious about what we do, nor our ability to prepare a witness. We attempt to get to know our client so well that we know exactly what they are or are not apt to say under different circumstances. We actually develop part of the defence strategy based on our involvement with our client.

In summary, regarding our involvement, when retained:

- Initially, we meet with the client and obtain all information they have pertaining to the allegation. This includes any and all reports, medical (where available) or investigative.

- Based on the information available, we begin preparing a defence to prove the client's innocence.

- In preparation of the defence, we determine if any polygraph or psychological testing is necessary or beneficial to the defence. (Again please note that polygraph testing is not admissible in Court in the United Kingdom.).

- If there has been an allegation, but no arrest or indictment, our immediate goal is to prepare a good defence which, hopefully, will head off any prosecution. Something which we have previously managed to accomplish on several occasions!

- If there has been an indictment or an arrest, we then discuss with the client's Barrister or Solicitor handling the matter, determine what they have done, what they are doing and what they plan to do. From this we can determine the preparation of a proper defence.

In many cases, it is not unusual at all that we ask the client not to reveal our involvement until we have had the opportunity to observe what specifically is being done from a legal standpoint. This is not an attempt to be sneaky, but we have been involved in cases where the Solicitor who had minimal experience in handling such cases, yet had the client convinced that "everything was fine."

We obtain all possible information, witnesses or evidence that will support the client's innocence.

We determine who will give evidence against the client, expert or otherwise, and attempt to gain information that will destroy their credibility, reports and / or evidence.

We carefully analyse all data, determine the manner in which it will be used by the prosecution, and then have it examined by a defence expert where necessary.

We build a structured set of questions for the client's Barrister and Solicitor to confront the client's complainant with. This is, of course, subject to rigorous legal requirements. This is a very delicate matter, especially in dealing in these types of cases.

If our involvement does continue through to trial, we take notes on all evidence, assist in the preparation of the client's evidence, attempt to "read" the jury as the trial progresses and assist the Barrister with a trial strategy.

In addition, we have also investigated, prepared a defence, consulted on False Allegations, Miscarriage of Justice, Criminal cases and assisted in reversing wrongful convictions.

Taken from a transcript of an appeal that we were involved with:-
In assessing the significance of this evidence we are reminded of what Lord Bingham said in R v Pendleton [2002] 1 WLR 72 at 83E:

"I am not persuaded that the House laid down any incorrect principle in Stafford, so long as the Court of Appeal bears very clearly in mind that the question for its consideration is whether the conviction is safe and not whether the accused is guilty. But the test advocated by counsel in Stafford and by Mr Mansfield in this appeal does have a dual virtue to which the speeches I have quoted perhaps gave somewhat inadequate recognition. First, it reminds the Court of Appeal that it is not and should never become the primary decision-maker. Secondly, it reminds the Court of Appeal that it has an imperfect and incomplete understanding of the full processes which led the jury to convict. The Court of Appeal can make its assessment of the fresh evidence it has heard, but save in a clear case it is at a disadvantage in seeking to relate that evidence to the rest of the evidence which the jury heard. For these reasons it will usually be wise for the Court of Appeal, in a case of any difficulty, to test their own provisional view by asking whether the evidence, if given at the trial, might reasonably have affected the decision of the trial jury to convict. If it might, the conviction must be thought to be unsafe."