Criminal solicitors have a lot of different avenues they can embrace to help their client navigate through the legal system.
Despite an aggressive prosecution team who will attempt to source a guilty plea or at least reparations with an admission of guilt, there are various strategies that can be employed to avoid those scenarios.
Members of the public might deem them to be dubious and immoral, but they are certified positions that can be adopted if there are facts that support the theory.
According to Papa Hughes – the Melbourne criminal lawyers, poking holes in the prosecution can be enough to weigh the burden of proof too heavily on their shoulders, but it takes a canny firm to use the right strategies at the right time.
Using an Alibi
An alibi can be questioned and examined by a prosecution if they wish to testify on the stand, but having a third party who can advocate for a defendant’s whereabouts or motives can help to influence a judge or jury. Their credibility and relationship to the individual will be put under the microscope to gauge their intentions about operating as an alibi, but it is considered one of the most effective legal strategies that a defence can leverage. Often the difficulty for counsel will be identifying a credible alibi if there are serious questions about their guilt or involvement in a crime.
Self Defence
The argument of self defence is an interesting ploy by a defence when faced with a serious crime. If the individual was under duress and believed that their life was endanger before committing a violent act, that is a credible approach to take. What will matter is the context of this incident and most importantly – where it occurred. Should it have taken place on the property of the defendant where a break in and intrusion was occurring, that will often be grounds for a successful plea if the force was proportionate and reasonable.
Unprofessionalism By Police
A police report can illustrate a great deal about a case and this will usually be the starting point for both sides of counsel. Yet there have been cases whereby DNA evidence has been contaminated, testimony has been sourced under duress, witnesses have be led by interrogators, or there has been tampering or mishandling of items that could heavily influence the case one way or the other. If there is misconduct and unprofessionalism on behalf of law enforcement, that should be noted.
Entrapment
If an individual has been coerced to commit a crime or they have been intimidated or overtly influenced to carry out an illegal act they would not normally have done, then they can use entrapment as an argument. They are rarely utilised but if there is grounds to state that someone has been taken advantage of or they have been blackmailed or pressured to undertake a task, then it is a potential avenue of defence.
Double Jeopardy Protections
Whilst there have been modifications with federal and state laws in relation to double jeopardy protections in Australia, it is still one of the methods in which clients can be protected from being prosecuted twice for the same crime. It becomes an abuse of power by the state if there is double punishment and a second prosecution after acquittal or after conviction. That position will change if fresh evidence can be introduced to escalate the charges however, but if the facts remain the same then there are protections that can cover a defendant from both state and federal matters.
Summary
It is important to emphasis that a defendant is innocent until proven guilty where the burden of proof lies with the prosecution beyond a reasonable doubt. These strategies might be viewed cynically by members of the public who consider the methods to be dubious and leveraging loopholes in the system, but they are genuine avenues that keep innocent people from being locked in jail cells.
