A walk to the park with his dog went terribly wrong.
Our client Mr M was charged with three offences; racially aggravated common assault on two counts and the possession knife in a public place.
On the morning of the offence, our client Mr M had taken his dog to Trent Park in Enfield.
When there, a larger dog approached his dog which reportedly began to act in an intimidating way and caused our client’s dog to yelp. The larger dog’s owner along with a friend approached Mr M.
Due to the way the dog was treating his dog, Mr M asked the men to move their dog away from his, so that his dog wouldn’t be injured.
Mr M believed that they then began to square up to him in response to his request. Mr M also began to be fearful that he was in the woods alone with two intimidating 6ft2 men.
It was alleged at this point by the two complainants, policemen Liam McGroarty and Thomas Charlton, that Mr M began to be verbally abusive by calling them “English ****”.
It was also alleged at this point Mr M removed a Swiss army knife from his pocket and threatened them with it.
There was no evidence to back up either of these claims, as demonstrated by the case investigation and representation provided by Stuart Miller Solicitor’s expert serious crime lawyer Duygu Basiguzel.
When questioned why he did not walk away with his dog when he felt threatened by the two men he stated:
“I am a family man … I should have just picked up my dog and walked away but they were following me.”
The two men, who were later revealed to be undercover police officers, alleged that Mr M produced a knife and threatened to stab their larger dog and them.
The Swiss army knife found in the centre console of Mr M’s car was not on his person during the alleged assault, which was discovered when on-duty police arrived.
Mr M is a property developer and uses the knife at work.
It was discovered in a witness statement from an on-duty police officer that no knife was found attached to his keyring, as stated in the accounts of the complainants.
To provide our client with the best possible outcome to his case, Duygu Basiguzel made representations before the hearing of our client and spoke to the Crown on behalf of Mr M.
She explained that there was no evidence to suggest that Mr M had the knife in his possession at the time of the alleged offences.
Duygu further made representations to the Crown on behalf of our client that the complainants, in this case, were two undercover police officers who had made contradicting statements regarding the incident in question.
Duygu instructed counsel on Mr M’s behalf to make representation to the court that the statements made by the police officers were false.
Thanks to hard work, diligent case investigation and expert representation by Duygu Basiguzel our client was acquitted of all three charges against him.