Falsly Accused Robbery

[gooner881]

have a son who has wwrongly been accused of robbery, his dna was found in the house, however he was friends with the defendant so there is no question of him breaking an entry or anything the defendant has said he let my son in voluntarily however the only evidence is the witnesses statement which is a lie, can this case be dismissed or does he have a case to answer, it is essentially his word vs the defendants how worried should we be

[gooner881]

bednobs hes in his mid20's . regarding full information there is literally very little that has been offered by the prosecution in terms of evidence, it ranges from the victims statement , to the dna - which does not equal a robbery and the statement of the officers who stopped and searched my son whilst on his way home from the supposed robbery location - the officers stated in their statement that he was not carrying anything that appeared to be from the robbery. we have heard the advice from his lawyers but it appears to be poor based on the lack of evidence that he should plead guilty and seems like they would rather save themselves the effort of preparing a defence case, sounds terrible i know but this is the impression - hopefully we're wrong., there is no medical evidence of injury however this isnt needed for robbery as there doesnt have to be actual injury sustained .

[sara3]

I doubt a jury would convict on virtually no evidence. Is he paying for his legal advice?

[craft1948]

Given the facts (from you) I'm amazed the CPS decided there was a case to prosecute, perhaps they're not Arsenal supporters.

[gooner881]

well it was a duty solicitor so its being sorted via legal aid we arent paying out of pocket no

[bednobs]

if your son is not confident or happy with his legal representation, or what they are advising him to do, then change. I honestly can't see how anyone can give you any reasonable advice here

[shoota]

Does your son have a 'history' with the Police that may have influenced tha decision to charge?

[Orderlimit]

Gooner, the victim has made an allegation to the police who have conducted an investigation and 'charged' your son with a criminal offence that correctly fits the circumstances, i.e., Robbery in this case. The basic definition of a 'charge' is that the offence is in the public interest to prosecute and that there is 'sufficient' admissible evidence for a prosecution to likely succeed in a conviction.

Just because a defendant or accused had permission to be inside a premises (scene) it does not automatically mean the DNA is useless and can not be used as prosecution evidence (it obviously depends on what was recovered and where).

[FredPuli43]

Your son's lawyer is only doing his duty in telling him that he will get a discount for pleading guilty. That is not telling him to plead guilty. Where do you get any idea from that having clients plead guilty, when they're not or when they are, makes the solicitor more money? He's going to get a jury trial out of it, and several days in court, on a fight, as against an hour in court on a plea of guilty, plus the extra preparation time for the trial. Which do you think earns him more?

If the CPS thinks it's worth proceeding with they must think that not only is there a prima facie case, but it's a case which appears to have a probable chance of resulting in a conviction and one which it is in the public interest to prosecute. That is so whether its one man's word alone as the basis of the case, or twenty witnesses including the Archbishop of Canterbury, two doctors and forensic science experts. It'll be up to your son's solicitor and counsel to show that that confidence was misplaced.