Chaynee Hodgetts successfully challenges key evidence, leading the CPS to offer no evidence in an alleged assault on an emergency worker.

Chaynee Hodgetts, instructed by Mr Jeremy Newell, Ms Patricia Wangui, and Mr Charlie Hutchins of Criminal Defence Solicitors, secured the Crown Prosecution Service’s offer of no evidence against a prisoner accused of assaulting a Prison Officer.

This matter was originally being dealt with under internal prison disciplinary procedures, before this was paused for it to be prosecuted as an assault on an emergency worker. The incident, captured on CCTV, involved the Prison Officer alleging the Client had spat at him following a disagreement. The Client, a devout Christian, maintained that he was refused permission to leave his cell to attend Church for Sunday worship (and subsequently was not even allowed out to empty his bin).

The Body Worn Video of another Officer, initially also marked by the Prosecution as “Not Disclosable” on the basis of there being “no material of relevance” therein, featured its wearer confirming that he had not unlocked the Client for the Chapel – and another telling him he ought to have done so. There then followed some discussion as to whether the Client, who is Autistic, should have been unlocked “for meds.”

Later on, the Complainant Officer could be heard on the recording to make an inappropriate remark about the Client. This footage was incorrectly marked as “Not Disclosable” on the basis of there being “no material of relevance” therein – but the inappropriate comment was edited out from the version relied upon by the Crown. Upon the Client being interviewed, even the Interviewing Officer observed that that footage was not particularly clear, and that he could not see clearly what had happened. Furthermore, the Police Occurrence Report (from the Unused Material) included the observation that the CCTV was not conclusive and did not show any spitting. The file also confirmed there were no forensics in this case.

Counsel for the Prosecution confirmed at court that, after reviewing the case, it was no longer in the public interest to prosecute, and formally offered no evidence – and a Not Guilty verdict was recorded.