Jury Rejects Stalking and Threats to Kill Allegations Against Autistic

Mr K was facing multiple serious charges relating to domestic violence. His ex-partner had accused him of seven separate offences, including non-fatal strangulation, stalking, and making threats to kill. The allegations stemmed from an incident in which the complainant claimed that a series of unwanted phone calls, followed by an in-person encounter, had made her feel unsafe. Mr K staunchly denied any wrongdoing, stating that he had contacted her out of concern for the daughter they shared, with no intention to alarm or intimidate.

From the start, Mr K’s case was weighed down with complications. He was refused bail and remanded into one of the most notoriously bleak prisons in the UK. Mr K is severely autistic and due to the poor conditions of his environment, he struggled to adapt while awaiting trial. In custody, his mental health began to quickly deteriorate. Concerned for his wellbeing, our defence team made regular contact with prison safeguarding teams to ensure that Mr K was coping well enough under the difficult circumstances. At one point, he was even declared unfit to plead – a rare declaration ahead of court proceedings. Eventually, two psychiatric reports determined that Mr K would be able to stand trial, as long as he could attend with the assistance of an intermediary, which we ensured was available to him.

From the outset, the trial was rife with complications. Despite not yet having a confirmed courtroom, the prosecution introduced a dangerous driving charge to the indictment, forcing last-minute adjustments to our defence strategy. Considering Mr K’s fragile mental state we were concerned that this setback could disrupt the flow of the trial, but thankfully he managed to maintain his composure. When the complainant gave evidence, it immediately raised concerns. We noticed several serious inconsistencies in her story and, during our cross-examination, exposed further contradictions in her version of events. Consequently, we submitted no case to answer, as the complainant’s account simply did not correlate with the allegations against Mr K. Such submissions are rarely successful, requiring the court to conclude that evidence is incapable of supporting a conviction. However, after we argued that the complainant’s account did not sustain a controlling and coercive behaviour charge, the judge agreed. Count four was withdrawn, and an automatic not guilty verdict was given to that allegation.

Following closing speeches from both sides, the jury went to deliberate the remaining charges, and later returned unanimous not guilty verdicts.

For a defendant who had been remanded, almost declared unfit to plead, and struggled throughout the process with severe mental health issues, the clarity of such a decision was a huge relief. After months in custody and years of uncertainty, the pressures of the charges undoubtedly placed a huge strain on Mr K. He had endured remand in harsh conditions and faced repeated psychiatric assessments, all while navigating proceedings as a severely autistic and mentally vulnerable defendant.

Our defence team made sure to offer proper safeguarding and support to Mr K throughout his case, and we made sure that we maintained this level of concern and attention when representing him in the courtroom. The jury’s unanimous verdict brought proceedings to a decisive and reassuring conclusion, clearing Mr K of every charge, and allowing him to walk free.