Is this Crown Court legal aid solicitor failing me, and should I sack him?

[dazed]

Case coming up Feb next year in Crown Court, alleging breach of restraining order.
Just been granted partial legal aid, but I am really uncomfortable with the solicitor who has been assigned, although the barrister seems OK having had one conversation.

There's a lot of things which don't add up - the WPC (the "W" may be important) who took statements from my ex sent an undated PIN through the post.
When I first met the duty solicitor, I said "they're saying they sent this PIN on (x date) and I didn't get it until (x weeks later - see postmark)".
His reply was "So what? You got it didn't you?". Which surprised me.

When I got the pros. docs, I spotted that the version of the PIN the WPC had submitted in evidence now had a date, and the signature had moved.

I also noted that my ex had submitted, in her evidence, screen shots of off-record text-message exchanges with the same WPC.

I also found that it was the same WPC who took a call from me, and closed the report BEFORE speaking to my witness, and made what seem weird notes in her log like "I could hear Mr X typing notes into a computer while speaking to him".

Initially, a different solicitor at that firm told me NOT to file a police complaint yet until the CPS had decided whether to prosecute.

Now that the prosecution is going ahead, the assisgned solicitor is now saying to almost every question:

"I am not in a position to advise you on [eg] police complaints".

He also wrote:

"I need to speak to any possible defence witnesses as soon as possible. I must disclose your defence witnesses full names and dates of birth to the prosecution urgently."

So I sent him a list, and he replied:

"The suitability of [your witnesses] can be discussed in your forthcoming conference with your barrister"

But the conference is not until mid-November, over a month away! I thought it was "urgent"!?

Finally, I noted that her ONLY witness at the original trial was sent home by the CPS before cross-questioning as "unreliable", and in the new CPS docs, I have found more statements which totally further contradict what the dismissed witness had written as a statement in the original trial. So I asked if we could force her to appear as a witness to be questioned on her original statement.

To which solicitor just replied:

I am afraid that I do not see the relevance of [her] to this trial.

Having shown the reply to a couple of ex-police friends, they think his reply is "pathetic", and "what the hell is he being paid for then?".
I was already thinking the same - surely he should be all over some of that like a rash?

They're suggesting I speak to the barrister immediately and ask her opinion, and whether she can act and continue with my case if instructed by another solicitor.

Problem: The barrister is one-way. Solicitor books call, Barrister phones from with-held number.

So to get in contact with her, I'd have to ask local solicitor to get her to call me.

And when I had a major problem with the school, the local solicitor told me they couldn't act against the head because of a "conflict of interest".

And the only contact I have had with the solicitor has been abrupt and terse to the point of almost seeming rude. I know Legal Aid doesn't pay the same as private, but this is incredbly serious for me.

VERY small town, police offiicer, complaining ex and school I complained against are all local.
(The complaint against the school was that they'd with-held my son's school records, and also changed his surname at the school on request of his mother without telling/asking me. That is now resolved.)

So, tell me: Am I being paranoid? Is this the normal level of response to be expected from a Crown Court defence solicitor, or do I need to be looking elsewhere?

Any suggestions?

[echat11]

islandgirl Can you kindly take a look and advise.

[islandgirl]

I deal with these kind of breaches but only in the magistrates court and am not really familiar with crown court procedure. However this is a crown court case so it must be a serious or oft repeated breach which is alleged? Disclosure of witness names would have been urgent for a pretrial hearing at which everything which will be relied on is disclosed. Actually dealing with these witnesses may well be done nearer the court date. This trial will deal only with the breach not with anything to do with the original offence. You are denying the beach - it is for the prosecution to prove you beached the order. As for not being happy with the solicitor - he or she is the key to your case as the barrister works with what they are given. I have no idea if you can change a legal aid instructed solicitor - you would need to research this with legal aid services or perhaps someone else here will know.

[dazed]

Disclosure of witness names would have been urgent for a pretrial hearing at which everything which will be relied on is disclosed.

No, nothing happened at the pre-trial with the exception of confirmation of charges and setting of date for hearing.

However this is a crown court case so it must be a serious or oft repeated breach which is alleged?.

No, one breach in 2 years, in that I approached my son on a busy Saturday morning in the high street and asked him how his Christmas was and whether he'd yet built the present I sent him. But she was there. The interaction lasted 45 seconds. I said nothing to her, nor is she alleging I spoke to her, but she was nearby. Half an hour after getting home, she phoned 101 and logged it.

A week later, I voluntarily attended for questioning. 7 months later, the police sent it to CPS who decided to proceed with prosecution. Since then, her written statement talks about how terrified she is now, that she can't sleep at night, has installed attack alarms, had to take time off work and so on (right, that'll be the work she was furloughed from at the time, would it?)

You are denying the beach

I'm not denying being in sight and earshot of her, what I am denying is that I "sought to approach or contact" her.
The police have ONE witness statement from a shopkeeper that I was chatting to, who confirms I was simply talking to her (the shopkeeper) when I spotted my son and went to speak to him.

In the pre-hearing the CPS read out the charge, and then the judge asked the CPS:

"Was that the only incident?".
"Yes"
"Any social media contact"?
"No"
"Any other contact, calls or visits?"
"No"
"So, just this one incident in the street?"
"Yes".

In the magistrates court previous to this, I had a duty solicitor who appeared to be excellent and was as surprised as anyone that it had got this far. After all, to be clear, I have never been arrested. In my life.
He told me that I had the choice of being heard in Magistrates or Crown, and he said I "absolutley" should choose Crown, because she would be "properly questioned" by a barrister and they would "tear her statement apart".

But this new solicitor assigned to the case is very unsettling, and now I'm getting worried that this isn't going to be properly defended. As my retired police sergeant friend said:
"I don't know who she knows, but you're getting totally stitched up".

By the way, would it surprise anyone to learn that underlying this is a fractious dispute over property ownership?
Or, despite having walked past her multiple times by chance (v.small town) without consequence, that this complaint occured just one month before my 2 year conditional discharge would have been up?

[islandgirl]

very interesting thank you. Nothing does happen at a pretrial except names of witnesses. a guess how long the trial will take and a fixing of a date, listing any disclosure which is still needed. That's it. I am however very surprised this is going to Crown. I deal with this stuff often in Mags, Duty must have had a reason but I have no idea what it is! If you have a CD how were you not arrested at some point - sorry if that seems like a daft question but there has to be an offence for CD I believe? If the order said "not to approach" then it is unfortunately not too easy to defend given your description and you will need very good representation. I see this sort of thing quite often, sadly - one person rings up the other asks them to come round then rings the Police and reports them for a breach.

[dazed]

I am however very surprised this is going to Crown. I deal with this stuff often in Mags, Duty must have had a reason but I have no idea what it is!.

See previous post:

He told me that I had the choice of being heard in Magistrates or Crown, and he said I "absolutley" should choose Crown, because she would be "properly questioned" by a barrister and they would "tear her statement apart".

The problem is, I live in the middle of nowhere in an extremely low-crime area where the worst that happens is someone nicking a quad bike. So whereas if there was real crime going on, this wouldn't even get picked up, when low hanging fruit turns up, the magistrates go over the top. Which is why he advised to opt for crown and a proper judge.

If the order said "not to approach" then it is unfortunately not too easy to defend given your description and you will need very good representation.

Exactly, and this is why I am worried, hence my original post. I am concerned that the solicitor is being lazy and isn't bothered. For example, it was ME that spotted that CPS prosecutor was claiming in Magistrates court that there was a "serious 999 call" at the time of the "offence", but in their own docs it showed it was just a 101 call half an hour after she got home later. No-one else picked up on that.

"Guilty" is complete ruination for me - conditional discharge gone, business effectively gone, payment of costs, possibly even potential custodial sentence.

So, going way back to the original question, would you think it was appropriate to start looking for other solicitors to take the case over?

[islandgirl]

Yes I saw that the Duty said go to Crown but as I said, I still do not know why (other than the reason you gave in your post which I don't get really but I am not a Solicitor). Believe me people get "properly questioned" in Mags court every day! I do not see how this could be custodial even if guilty (but I don't have the details and nor do I know the kind of sentences Crown Court judges give in these circumstances) Top end in Mags (based solely on the info above and without full knowledge of the case and the circumstances) I would see a community order (with unpaid work/fine) though this would depend on the actual incident and its effect on the people involved .It would also depend on why you have a CD? However your aim is to be found Not Guilty, clearly...and for that you need good representation. As I have said I have no idea whether you can change your solicitor if you are on legal aid - have you asked? Can you go and see your Solicitor and discuss?

[DE DOGS]

I am not experienced in this sort of dispute but as advised by your Policeman friend. "I don't know who she knows, but you're getting totally stitched up". Personally, I would make every effort to speak to your Barrister, she will advise on the best action to take.