It has been nearly 3 months since "the knock" for me and thanks to this forum, I'm a lot more informed about the types of things to expect. Today I had a call with my legal aid solicitor and directly asked him if any restrictions imposed on me at the point of conviction would be challenged if deemed as disproportionate to my crime. He seemed to imply that he'd just accept whatever restrictions the court decides are fitting, and that I shouldn't make a fuss about it, which I wasn't pleased to hear.

Separately, I may be due to come into some money soon, so I was considering changing solicitor due to the above and other similar conversations. Does anyone have any tips on how best to choose a solicitor? I see a lot of them claiming that they are specialists in online sexual offences, but I don't know how to tell if that's true, or if it even makes a difference.

For context, my charge is related to indecent online communications with an older child and I live in Scotland.

I'm aware of the R v Smith (2011) ruling, but I'm unclear if that can be used as relevant case law when it comes to Scots law.

Th eguidance was given by the Court of Appeal in London, so if there is a separate Court of Appeal in Scotland then it probably doesn't automatically apply. Having said that, the guidance itself is based on human rights law, which does apply in Scotland, so it might be a case of having to make the same arguments. If your solicitor isn't prepared to do that, even if you do all the work, maybe a letter to the court might help. I was convicted in England, but before the guidelines, and my solicitor was taking my instructions in court while the barrister was making the argments, which the judge ignored, and it had to go back to court years later to get it sorted out, with the support of the police, amazingly. If you can write to the judge making the points you want to make, that might be good enough.

=========================================================================================================

If you are to punish a man retributively you must injure him. If you are to reform him you must improve him. And men are not improved by injuries. (George Bernard Shaw)

If you can afford a more experienced solictior then 100% absolutely do so, the duty solicitors only do the bare minimum. They will make out they are your "best friends" but the reality is, in stead of defending your rights they just accept what ever terms the prosecution make in the hopes that your duty solicitors can avoid a custodial sentence. As for searching for one, I would search around and just check out all the reviews and see what they all say.

You could always argue the R V Smith ruling and just see what is said

Hi
  http://www.andrewstorchsolicitors.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michael-phillips-37209925

If you go to this site and look for Michael Philips and read his bio and case history.
He is in Reading

Hopefully you will find him very good.

Cheers




Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------

This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.

Thank you all for your responses, much appreciated.

I researched it a bit more and it looks like the principles of the R v Smith (2011) ruling are incorporated into Scots law, but not as a direct result of that ruling. It seems the ruling can be mentioned but Scottish courts may or may not consider it.

@JASB - thank you for that recommendation but as that solicitor is based in Reading, I'm assuming I won't be able to hire him, both due to the geographical distance and the differences between Scots law as opposed to England and Wales.

I suppose what I meant to ask was, are there any specific review sites, etc. that should be trusted more than others?
I found Scullion Law in Glasgow, who have a suspiciously high number of good reviews on both Trustpilot and ReviewSolicitor, but I'm not sure if that's due to them potentially incentivising good reviews for a discount or something like that.

I'm also unsure what's better - smaller or larger scale solicitors? Smaller scale solicitors may have a lack of resources but may be more inclined to prove themselves, whereas the opposite could be said for larger scale solicitors.
I just wish there was a way to see the outcomes of similar cases to mine that they have represented in the past, but I know that's highly unlikely due to confidentiality, etc.

The Lucy Faithfull Foundation recommended that I get an autism assessment via my solicitor but he refused and said it's something for my GP rather than him, but LF claim some of their previous clients have been successful in getting an autism assessment via a legal aid solicitor. Does anyone have any experience in this type of thing?

Hi
I used him remotely for the first application I did for my SOPO conditions. That hearing was in chambers and he didn't have to travel etc. he was also very good and honest in managing expectations if you get my meaning.
In regard to the other points I couldn't say but he is or was very good on remote communications

Re you looking at other case outcomes; my experience is forget that as it is down to the Judge's opinion.

In my case a similar scenario defendant but with more serious offences, received a non custodial sentence where I was sent down. Many people here know my story so I will not bore you with that but just to say external societal events changed the view of the Judge in sentencing. 

I had to push my solicitor to get a psychological assessment; on legal aid, which was not worth much at the trial but became useful at a later date when challenging things. 
For the record my pre sentence report recommended non custodial but that didnt hold much power.

Re big or small, I went big and at first unknown to me, I had a trainee managing my case and meeting me under guidance of a solicitor. At a later date the Legal Ombudsman found they acted incorrectly and awarded me compensation but that was too late.
In other words double check the qualifications and experienec of the person you are dealing with.

Society suggests I must let go of all my expectations but I disagree, as whilst I have a voice, I have hope.

Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope is for tomorrow else what is left if you remove a mans hope.
------------------------------

This forum supports these words, thank you Unlock and your contributors.

Thank you for your response JASB, that's very helpful. I'll keep researching all of my options so I'm ready if I end up getting some more money soon.

Looking back if I had the opportunity I would have paid privately for a solicitor rather than using a duty solicitor. My duty solicitor was terrible. Told me several times I would be released on tag within a few months of being sentenced which was a lie as RSO's don't get released on tag. He told me a lot of half truths I think it was either incompetence or just to make me feel better..

The barrister he recommended was equally as bad and all he did was agree with the judge and when it came to sentencing failed to mention the probation report which recommended a community order. I got sentence to 28 months and I believe if I had a better barrister I would have had a reduced sentence.

If you have the money certainly look for someone else but I really can't help you find a solicitor.

Best of luck