Conferencing:
Extract 1 : Introduction & The skills
Extract 2 : The brief & Preparation of the case
Extract 3 : Conference plan & Transcript
Extract 4 : Analysis
The Brief
IN THE EAST LANARSHIRE CROWN COURT INDICTMENT No.56757
THE QUEEN
V
BILL VRICE
INSTRUCTIONS TO COUNSEL
ADVISE IN CONFERERENCE
Counsel will find enclosed herein,
1. The Indictment
2. Statements of the Prosecution
3. Mr. Vrice's proof of evidence
4. Mr. Vrice's previous convictions
Counsel is asked to instruct Mr. Vrice who is charged with the offence of theft.
Unfortunately Instructing Solicitors have been unable to take full instructions on the contents of the witness statements. Accordingly Counsel is asked to conduct a conference with Mr. Vrice in order to advise him on the likely outcome of the case and a suitable plea.
INDICTMENT INDICTMENT No.56757
THE QUEEN
V
BILL VRICE
Who is charged as follows:
STATEMENT OF OFFENCE
Theft, contrary to section (1) of the Theft Act 1968
PARTICULARS OF OFENCE
Bill Vrice on the 16th of December 2002 stole a wrist watch from, and belonging to AGEM Stores
Officer of the Court
WITNESS STATEMENT OF KELLY JORDAN
I Kelly Jordan am employed as a store detective at AGEM Stores. The contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge. I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have willfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.
1. On the 16th of December I was working as usual ay the AGEM Store at Red City High Street. I was dressed in my usual store security clothes.
2. It had been a very quiet day in the store. At approximately 3.00 p.m however my suspicions were aroused when I saw a man, which I now know to be Bill Vrice, trying on several watches at the jewelry counter of the store. He was dressed in black jeans with a black pullover and a cream coloured overcoat. Not only was he trying on a lot of watches but he seemed to be looking about a lot. This certainly aroused my suspicion so I took up a position behind the CD section of the music department of the store so I could observe him. He kept asking a member of staff to try on another and then another watch. The member of staff had to keep turning her back to him to get each new watch for him.
3. I remember thinking what was the member of staff doing as she simply placed each watch on the counter after Mr. Vrice had tried them on. After he had tried on seven or eight watches, he turned around and saw me watching him. He then left the department hastily and walked towards the sports equipment of the shop. He had a brief look at the trainers, and then headed towards the exit of the shop. I followed him keeping my distance until he had left the store. He was still looking around and turned around and saw me. He then began to quicken his pace as he got nearer the exit doors.
4. He then left the store without paying for the goods. I followed him out of the store and asked him to pull up his sleeves. He ran away and I chased him down the street. I had to stop him by the use of force. I put my arms around him and tackled him to the ground. With the help of Mr. Smith, a manager at the store, I restrained him. I asked him to roll up his sleeves again and I saw he was wearing a watch with the price tag of the store still on it. I arrested him on suspicion of stealing the watch from the store.
5. The value of the watch was £689.99. I produce the goods as RX1.
6. I am willing to attend court to give evidence.
Signed: KELLY JORDAN
Witnessed by: Bob Smith Date: 21st of December 2002
WITNES STATEMENT OF BOB SMITH
I Bob Smith am employed as a manager at AGEM Stores. The contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge. I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have willfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.
1. On the 16th of December I was working as usual ay the AGEM Store at Red City High Street as a manager in the sports equipment section.
2. At approximately 3.10 p.m my attention was drawn to a man, I now know as Mr. Vrice looking at trainers in my department. He was dressed in black jeans with a black pullover and a cream overcoat. I went over to him as he was looking about a lot. He looked quite suspicious. I asked him if he had lost someone or was looking for something. He replied that "no he was fine". I then returned to my position and noticed that one of our store detectives Kelly Jordan was watching him. She then followed him as he left my department and began walking towards the doors. Soon after they left a young boy appeared and told me that he couldn't find his daddy. His description met Mr. Vrice's. I now know this boy to be to the son of Mr. Vrice, Mark Vrice.
3. I ran out with Mark to catch Mr. Vrice. Upon getting to them I saw a struggle so went to help our store detective Kelly Jordan in restraining the person that turned out to be Mr. Vrice. Mark then ran to his father.
4. I am willing to attend court to give evidence.
Signed: Bob Smith
Witnessed by: KELLY JORDAN Date: 21st of December 2002
WITNES STATEMENT OF PETER WALL
I Peter Wall am a police constable stationed at Red City. The contents of this statement are true to the best of my knowledge. I make it knowing that if it is tendered in evidence, I shall be liable to prosecution if I have willfully stated in it anything which I know to be false or do not believe to be true.
1. I was called to the AGEM Store at Red City High Street to pick up a suspected shop lifter.
2. When I arrived a man I now know to be Mr. Vrice, was being kept in an office at the store by a group of employees, including two people I now know to be to Kelly Jordan and Bob Smith. Mr. Vrice became instantly agitated. He said "look will you tell these fucking idiots I was just looking for my son" I told him not to use that language when a child was present, a boy, I now know to be Mark Vrice, was in the room. He replied "What the fuck are you going to do about it" I then told him that I was arresting him and cautioned him for theft. He then said "Okay I fucking did it, is that what you need to fucking hear to let me go?"
3. In the charge room at the police station Mr. Vrice kept saying that he would admit the charge if we could "ignore the formalities" and he could be let go.
4. I was present when the defendant was charged at 5.30 pm. The charge was read over to Mr. Vrice and he replied, "Think what you fucking want".
5. I am willing to attend court to give evidence.
Signed: P Wall
Witnessed by: T Montgomery Date: 21st of December 2002
PROOF OF EVIDENCE
Bill Vrice will say:
I am 42 years old. I live at 456 Garden Park, Red City.
I have three children with her, the youngest of whom is Mark aged four. I am married to Angela Vrice and am currently unemployed and claiming benefits.
I have been in trouble with the police previously. Once was when I needed some Christmas presents. I was drunk and took some jewelry from a shop. I was charged with theft and fined £350. I also got involved in a fight outside a pub three months ago and I was charged with actual bodily harm. I was given a conditional discharge for 6 months. I am in breach of this order if I get convicted of this offence. Since then I have not been in any trouble with the police.
On the 21st of December I went into the AGEM store on Red City High Street. I was with my youngest son Mark and I was looking for Christmas presents. I got side tracked by some watches that I saw. I have to admit I got quite side tracked by the watches. I looked down during this time and Mark had wandered off. He has a nasty habit of doing this and has got himself into some right scrapes before. I panicked and went looking for him.
I went over to the sport section and couldn't find him. I was looking all over the place for him. I thought I saw him outside the shop. It was then that a store security guard tried to arrest me on the suspicion of stealing the watch. I ran off and she caught me.
I really don't want to go to prison for this. I am looking for a job at the moment. I have kids to support. My wife only has a part time job and she would find it very difficult to support all the kids on their own. Therefore I would prefer it that the Court wasn't told about my previous trouble with the police.
ANTECEDENTS
NAME : Bill Vrice
AGE : 42 (date of birth January 4th 1961)
ADDRESS : 456 Garden Park, Red City.
DATE COURT CONVICTION SENTENCE
1/2/97 Greenwell Theft (6counts) £350
Magistrates
6/9/02 Greenwell ABH Conditional Discharge 6 months.
Magistrates
Preparation of The Case
Summary
Location/Time Chambers 11.00am January 6th 2003
Client: Mr. Bill Vrice
Instructing Solicitors: Patterson and Co.
Date of Birth: January 4th 1961.
Age: 42 years
Married Mrs. Angela Vrice
Children: 3 including Mark Vrice (4yrs old)
Occupation: Unemployed
Address: 456 Garden Park, Red City.
Charge: Theft, contrary to section 1(1) of the Theft Act 1968. Alleged to have stolen a watch valued at £689.99 from the AGEM Store on Red City High Street.
Preliminary view of the events and the charge.
Mr. Vrice denies committing the offence of theft as charged. He was found with the watch still on his wrist. He remains adamant that he was looking for his 4 year old son Mark whilst in the shop. His son was certainly in the store. It is clear form the evidence that Mark was not with his farther in the store as he turned up in Mr. Smith's Department. Possible explanation for the fact that he looked suspicious? There were many watches on the table - did he realise this - if so why did he not take them as well? The fact that he ran away initially could suggest guilt. He had to be stopped by force. Problematic that he had to be physically tackled. The admittance of guilt in the room at the store and the police station will not help matters.
The client will need advice on how to plead based on the evidence. He will need advice on the likely sentence and possible defenses that are open to him. The client wants to know whether or not he can hide the fact of his previous convictions.
Legal Analysis
The Charge
The charge is theft contrary to s 1(1) of the Theft Act 1986. It is alleged that Mr. Vrice stole a watch to the value of £689.99 from AGEM stores in Red City High Street.
In order to secure a conviction the prosecution will have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that Mr. Vrice,
(a) Appropriated - on the facts this would not seem to be disputed. Mr. Vrice had no authorization to remove the watch, so he assumed the answer of rights of the owner under section 3(1) of the Theft Act.
(b) Property - the watch
(c) Belonging to another -the property belonged to AGEM.
(d) Dishonestly - Evidence to support the finding of dishonesty. Suspicious looking about, also he sped up near the exit and when asked to stop he ran off. He was then restrained with force. He also confessed to carrying out the offence in the room at AGEM and at the police station.
(e) intention to permanently deprive - this would seem to be satisfied by the fact that Mr. Vrice had left the premises and had to be stopped by force.
2 stage test for dishonesty, as set out in the case of R v Ghosh [1982] 75 Cr App R 154 CA. Firstly was the defendant dishonest according to the ordinary standards of reasonable and honest people? If not the prosecution fails. Secondly did the Defendant realise that what he was doing was by those standards dishonest?
Sentence if Pleads guilty or Found Guilty
Under section 1B(1) the Powers of Criminal Courts Act when there is a breach of a conditional discharge, if Mr. Vrice pleads guilty or pleads not guilty and is subsequently found to be guilty then the trial will take place in the currency of the discharge. The court can sentence Mr. Vice in a manner that they would have sentenced him for previously as if he was been convicted for the offence at the current trial. I would think that a likely sentence for both the offences together would be 6 - 12 months months, and 3 -6 months with a guilty plea. This is based on the current evidence only however.
Factual Analysis
Date of alleged theft was 21st December: Observed trying on a lot of watches in the AGEM store by the Store Detective, who says that he was looking about suspiciously. Client has failed to explain this looking about.
The client then moved to the sports section to look for his child, Mark. The store detective followed him. He then made his way to the exit. He then began to speed up as he got nearer the entrance. The client has offered no explanation for this. The store detective tried to stop him and he ran off. Again there is no explanation for this. Meanwhile the child, Mark, turned up at the Sports Department. In a room in the store in front of PC Wall, and at the police station Mr. Vrice admitted to committing the offence.
Previous Offences - theft of jewelry, also around Christmas time. And given a conditional discharge. Suggestion of drink involved both times.
Questions Needed to Ascertain the relevant Information.
Check the personal information
Had Mr. Vrice been drinking?
Short of money at the moment?
Bought Christmas Presents for your children and partner/wife (if applicable)?
Why try on so many watches?
Why looking about so much whilst at the watch counter?
Where is the Sports Department located in the store?
Why go to the Sports Department?
Why not tell the manger that came over what had happened?
Why go towards the exit without your son?
Why not stop when then the Store detective asked you to?
Why run away?
Why admit the offence?
Why carry on admitting in the interview room at the police station?
Check details of previous conviction.
Preliminary conclusion on the Merits
Strong evidence that Mr. Vrice appears to fulfill the requirements of the offence. Likely that the prosecution would prove theft on the current facts. He was looking about a lot - suggesting dishonesty. He didn't inform anyone of the loss of his son, even when directly asked - again hinting at dishonesty. Evidence that he knew that the detective was watching him. He sped up near the entrance then ran off after being asked to stop. He had to be refrained by force. He then admitted the offence on several occasions. Strong evidence of an intention to permanently deprive. Previous convictions will not help matters, especially as one is strikingly similar to this offence.
Preliminary Advice
Scenario One - the information given by Mr. Vrice reveals
cogent evidence that points towards a lack of dishonesty
and intention to permanently deprive. Advise a plea of not
guilty.
Scenario Two -Conference reveal little evidence that throws
light on the current evidence or reveals nothing at all
- advice a plea of guilty. However remind Mr. Vrice that
if he did not intend to steal the watch then he should not
plead guilty.
Remember that you should inform Mr. Vrice that the final decision lies with him.
Other Points - Do the previous convictions need to be revealed? Mr. Vrice should be told that I have no duty to disclose a conviction if the Court is not aware of it under paragraph 702 part VII Code of Conduct. However Mr. Vrice cannot be put forward to the court as a person of good conduct under paragraph 302 Part III of the Code of Conduct. If Mr. Vrice decides to plead guilty then the best line to take is the admittance of the past convictions in order to get full credit for full and frank disclosure and ensure that the mitigation on his behalf is effective as possible.
A finding of guilt on this offence will lead to all job
applications being subject to the Rehabilitation of Offenders
Act 1974 as the offence is one of dishonesty.
Extract 1 : Introduction & The skills
Extract 2 : The brief & Preparation of the case
Extract 3 : Conference plan & Transcript
Extract 4 : Analysis
Legal Notice - None of our work is to be passed off as your own or as anyone else's, nor is it to be reproduced either in whole or in part. This a breach of copyright. It also constitutes plagiarism and will breach University Regulations, consult your guidelines if you are unsure. If we suspect that any law essays or materials are being used for such purposes then we will refuse to carry out that work and all future essay work for the person involved.
Refund Policy : Law Essays UK has a strict no refund policy due to the highly specialised and individual nature of the services we provide. Our services are provided as is, and accordingly the customer orders on their own initiative. However, for your peace of mind, we guarantee that if you are not satisfied with an essay, for whatever reason, then we can amend it accordingly to your specifications. In addition, under our crystal clear guarantee, we will clarify anything contained within an essay or study material free of charge
Note: We offer a wholly independent law and legal research service. We are not affiliated with the Bar Council or any other organisation in any other way. Nor are they affiliated with us. We regret that we are unable to take on work from members of the public and businesses outside of doing model answers as law essays, legal essays, research and tutoring as to do so would contravene Bar Council regulations. All research services and materials offered are subject to availability. 5 day completion for law essays of 5,000 words or less only. All services are subject to availability. All trademarks and copyrights of other bodies and organisations are recognised and respected.
Visitors have also looked at...
1Law Essay Scams
Essay writing scams can be hard to spot.
Click here to find out how to avoid the essay scams2Essay writing in the press
Find out what the press say about essay writing in the 21st century.
3 Meet the Law Essays UK Team
Find out more about the individuals that provide this first class essay writing service.
