Magistrates Court: Plea Hearing: Member of Public correction [BEFORE] hearing started

[Cremant2025]

Can a member of the public correct the Defendant's solicitor if they are showboating in Magistrates' Court BEFORE the hearing began, maligning the Victim and giving an inaccurate/untrue version of events? Google/AI is giving conflicting advice one search returned, 'In a magistrates' court plea hearing, BEFORE the case formally starts, a solicitor may discuss the case with their clients. It's possible for a member of the public to correct them if they make an inaccurate statement about the legal process or case details. and 'Corrections by the Public: While it is not standard, a member of the public could correct the solicitor if they make an incorrect statement about the law, procedure or case details. Another search returned something different!
The Victim was told by the police their presence was NOT required at the plea hearing, however the handling of the case had been woeful from the start, hence a relative took a seat in the public gallery to observe but was so incensed by the showboating of the solicitor that they made a correction. That set the cat amongst the pigeons with both defence/prosecution leaving the court room to discuss in private, consultation with the Defendant. Member of public advised by Police Prosecution that clarifying statements from all parties would now be required [straightforward case ongoing almost a year] and when hearing did start, it was adjourned [no official reason given]. Had member of public not been there it seems that the Defendant's solicitor could get away with saying anything.....no confidence [sorry] in police prosecution. Any advice gratefully received.

[islandgirl]

If the magistrates were not in the court none of what was said before matters. We would not have heard it or had any knowledge of it. If incorrect statements were given in evidence in front of the mags then it is for the prosecutor to correct them, not the public. And it was only a plea hearing so no evidence would be heard anyway, just a broad outlining of the facts.

[Cremant2025]

Hi Island Girl
Thanks so much for taking the time to respond. The member of the public [unaccustomed to court proceedings] was shocked at the showboating by the Defendant's solicitor and concerned that her opinion was going to be presented as fact. It seems the intervention from the public gallery has resulted in the need now to obtain 'clarification' statements, so that can only be a good thing even though it's delaying things further.

[islandgirl]

I am surprised that this was done to be honest - it seems some crucial element of the case had been missed or confused. I would have thought the trial date would have been set and directions given for new evidence to be served if necessary. Where I sit we are setting trials a year from now where the defendant is on bail so nothing will happen quickly...I hope it is not as bad where you are.

[Cremant2025]

Thanks Island Girl, I'm afraid the case [fairly straightforward] has been plagued by inefficiencies by the police force. It's not an understatement to say it's been a catalogue of errors. In brief, I was bitten by a dog. A dog walker was in charge at the time and had the dog on a long lead and brought the dog into the area where I was and allowed contact [after I'd checked the dog was friendly]. I crouched down to pet the dog which it accepted / enjoyed and another person did the same. Dog did not exhibit any warning signs [I am used to dogs] and launched an unprovoked attack resulting in severe facial injuries. The dog walker stated he had never done anything like that before. Ambulance, surgery etc. Turns out that the dog had bitten in almost similar circumstances previously and the owners had engaged a behaviourist, reported to police but NFA and police did not insist on muzzling the dog or keeping it on a short lead and owners never told the dog walker not to allow interaction! Had it been a child the consequences would have been disastrous. I consider the dog owners should also be charged as they should have been responsible and ensured it was muzzled in public going forward or at least warned the dog walker not to allow contact. The dog walker is now saying that they issued me with a warning before the incident which is crazy, who would crouch down and pet a dog if they'd been told it had previously bitten. The onus was surely on the dog walker not to approach me. This is why the Defence solicitor's stance before the hearing was challenged from the public gallery....Had some sympathy with the dog walker as appears they have taken the fall on behalf of the owners but now we have established their 'defence' is based on lies my sympathy has evaporated. So almost a year and we're only at the plea hearing stage which has now been adjourned until next month.
The concern is that if someone had not been present in my stead the Defence could have entered a plea say of Guilty and the sentence would have been affected by what their Defence said [which was not true] and the Prosecution police officer [not CPS as we'd been told] did not appear to rebuff the solicitor's story of how the incident arose. All very worrying.

[islandgirl]

I am very sorry to hear what happened. Is the charge "dog dangerously out of control"? I see what you mean about the defence saying there was a warning when you say there was not. This issue should have been raised previously and it is relevant to the case - although I would argue that if the dogwalker knew it had bitten previously they should not have allowed you to pet it anyway, warned or otherwise and should have kept it away from contact. I have a little dog which is uncomfortable around strangers and absolutely ensure it is muzzled or not allowed ot go near new people at all just in case (though I do not think it would bite). Perhaps the Police solicitor would have contradicted the story in court? Anyway it is good that they have gone off to look at everything in detail now.

[efpom]

The OP may wish to consider suing both owner and dog-walker for his/her injuries.

[islandgirl]

A criminal conviction will certainly help a civil claim - the OP can ask for compensation as part of the criminal case sentence

[Cremant2025]

Hi Island Girl
Thank you for your response, yes it is a charge of dog dangerously out of control.
We asked the police to also charge the dog owners but the police said the owners had a defence and they and CPS said there was no realistic prospect of a charge, despite as we said that the dog had bitten previously in very similar circumstances.
We considered that any responsible owner would have ensured after the first unprovoked attack that their dog was muzzled in public, or at the least not allowed their dog walker to allow engagement.
We felt that it should be up to the Court to decide as initially the dog walker claimed the dog had never done anything like that before but then following a telephone conversation with the dog owners they admitted their dog had bitten before in similar circumstances and they said they had told the dog walker about the previous incident.
It seems now that the dog walker, who is taking the fall for this, is seeking to put the blame on me and said that she warned me that he might bite which is clearly nonsense. Who's going to engage with a dog that 'might bite'. She had the dog on a long lead and approached me and my partner while we were taking shelter from the rain and moved into our space. Any reasonable person would not bring the dog into that situation.

[Cremant2025]

The OP may wish to consider suing both owner and dog-walker for his/her injuries.

Thank you - I think we may consider this once the case is heard it will depend on finances. We thought this was a fairly straightforward case given the previous injury and medical evidence but the police have, I am sorry to say, been absolutely hopeless, it's been quite an eye-opener and very disheartening.

[islandgirl]

I think it would be difficult to charge the owners as they did not have charge of the dog on the day and there was no order that the dog had to be muzzled in public I assume. They had a duty to tell the dog walker to keep the dog away from people and any reasonable owner should have done so. Make sure you ask the Police solicitor to ask the magistrates for compensation for you. The dog walker should be insured for incidents such as this if they were running a business.

[Cremant2025]

A criminal conviction will certainly help a civil claim - the OP can ask for compensation as part of the criminal case sentence

Thanks Island Girl, I think the police mentioned something like £250 is the maximum? We've already run up that amount with hospital trips and scar cream and scar plasters - once you're discharged from hospital there's no provision - so I've had to buy these myself.
We're not sure next steps as I was told I was 'not required' to attend the plea hearing but I'm glad now someone attended on my behalf. I'll go to the next hearing - I have provided my VPS to be read out - but police said that after the plea has been entered the Court may issue a sentence then, so it's not clear to me, who is going to put my side of the story up as if it's a 'plea' hearing and they plead guilty then that's it? I'd rather it went to trial so I can give my account as I am not confident with the police handling so far. Thank you for your responses it's almost a year now and still not resolved.

[Cremant2025]

I think it would be difficult to charge the owners as they did not have charge of the dog on the day and there was no order that the dog had to be muzzled in public I assume. They had a duty to tell the dog walker to keep the dog away from people and any reasonable owner should have done so. Make sure you ask the Police solicitor to ask the magistrates for compensation for you. The dog walker should be insured for incidents such as this if they were running a business.

The dog walker is a friend and I think 'in business' with them... you are correct there was no order that the dog be muzzled in a public however the dog walker moved the dog into direct contact with me by taking shelter under a tree [...other trees were available!] when it was raining. It was on a long lead [not sure what the LEAD notice issued by the police specified].

Given I was told I was NOT required to attend the plea hearing I didn't have an opportunity to speak to the Police solicitor [indeed I was informed previously the CPS would be prosecuting but on the day it was the police!] and the police contact did not mention I had to specify I wanted compensation [they have been hopeless] so I will write to the Police today to ensure this is passed onto the police solicitor.

Can I ask the police to provide me with the evidence they intend to present? So I can check for accuracy? I did make a SAR previously but it has been radically redacted.
Thank you

[efpom]

The OP might find this useful:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidanc...s-dog-offences

[islandgirl]

Sentencing guidlines clearly state compensation should be considered: https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk...on-is-injured/