Sexual Offences

Our award-winning team of criminal defence solicitors are highly experienced in sexual allegations and historic cases, ensuring you get the best defence.

It is hard to think of anything worse than being falsely accused of sexual misconduct. The hint of an allegation can have a devastating impact on your friends, family and business. Not just your freedom but your career and reputation is at stake.

As private crime lawyers specialising in cases involving professional men accused of sexual assault we understand the predicament facing anyone in this situation. At BSQ we have a track record of successfully defending individuals accused of sex crimes. Our early pre-charge interventions have resulted in the dismissal of many cases that should never have been brought in the first instance in our view.

Our private client crime department in this area is headed by partner Roger Sahota. Roger specialises in defending professionals and high-net worth individuals in sex crime investigations and prosecutions. As our case studies show, in many of Roger’s cases charges have been averted after BSQ’s early intervention. Roger also has a particular specialisation in defending historic sex allegations. Past cases the firm has been instructed include allegations dating back more than 50 years made against clerics, teaching professionals and army officers.

Pro-active Defence

With increased reporting and the rise of the “Me Too” movement there has been an explosion in the number of prosecutions for sex offences in recent years. It is now estimated that one-third of all Crown court cases relate to sexual offences. These cases form a substantial part of our caseload and our reputation stems from our pro-active efforts to steer our clients away from charge and prosecution.

Clients often approach us after they have been interviewed unrepresented or by a Duty Solicitor. Many are concerned that, after the initial police interrogation, their lawyers have not asked them to provide further information or considered any proactive lines of enquiry.

Whilst some lawyers believe that there is little that can be done during the police investigation stage, experience has shown us that taking a proactive approach can reap rewards. These pre-charge enquiries are, we believe, an essential function of a defence lawyer acting for individuals accused of serious sexual offences.

In many of our cases, our clients are in possession of evidence that may cast serious doubt on allegations made against them. Past experience tells us that disclosing rebuttal evidence to the police early on in an investigation can bring it to a swift conclusion without any criminal charges.

In recent cases we have served previously overlooked defence evidence to the police (such as the below) which has directly led to decisions not to charge or prosecute.:

• Text and email evidence proving a prior consensual relationship

• Video footage taken on a mobile phone of consensual sexual activity

• Letters from the complainant digesting that they were in a happy and stable relationship at the time of an allegation

This type of information can often be critical in proving that a complainant or witness may have had an improper ulterior motive in making an allegation – such as a desire for mischief, revenge or a financial reward. Alternatively, we will see if enquiries are required to show that previous allegations of sexual misconduct have been made against others that were not proceed with by the police.

Sex crime prosecutions have fallen in last few years after the police and the CPS abandoned their policy of “believing all victims” following the 2016 Henriques review into the Metropolitan police. This concluded the policy resulted in a reversal of the burden of proof.

Anecdotal evidence from practitioners suggests that in the aftermath of this prosecutorial sea change fewer cases are being sent to the CPS for charging decisions. CPS lawyers are also now more reluctant to authorise charges than was previously the case. They may been been influenced by the rising proportion of sex cases ending in acquittals.

Against this context BSQ regularly intervenes on behalf of our clients by submitting detailed legal submissions – highlighting for example unlawful police conduct and arguing that a prosecution cannot be justified in accordance with the Code for Crown prosecutors and CPS Charging standards . These submissions often persuade the police and CPS to discontinue an investigation by concluding that there is no reasonable prospect of a conviction or that charges can not be justified in the public interest.

Thanks to BSQ’s pre-charge interventions many of our clients have avoided prosecution entirely - see our news and case studies below.

Client A, a high-profile banker, was arrested following an allegation that he had sexually assaulted his former girlfriend. BSQ partner Roger Sahota. was instructed to re-charge. BSQ enquiries revealed evidence that directly contradicted the complainant’s account. Representations were made to the Police Rape and Serious Sexual Offences (RASSO) unit. All charges were dropped before the matter was referred to the CPS following an internal review by the police.

Client B, the Managing Director of a property development company was accused of sexually assaulting a sex worker in a West End London hotel. BSQ partner Roger Sahota. was instructed pre-charge. Following an independent BSQ investigation, detailed representations were made to the Crown. After referral to the CPS, no further action was taken.

Client C, a marketing executive, was accused of sexually assaulting a young lady he had met in a bar. The complainant had accompanied him back to his home. The next morning she made a report of sexual assault to the police. BSQ partner Roger Sahota was instructed. BSQ conducted a thorough investigation obtaining statements from several witnesses which were later provided to the Police Rape and Serious Sexual Offences (RASSO) unit. Following an internal review, the case was dropped.

Clients D and E, two separate cases featuring University students now based in the USA and South America. Having left the UK where they had attended college, they were contacted by the police concerning allegations of sexual assault made by complainants they had studied with previously. Initially the police wanted to conduct virtual interviews with D and E who were domiciled abroad. BSQ advised the investigating officers that that virtual interviews of suspects were not permitted under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. It was agreed that both clients would provide detailed written statements in response to the disclosure provided by the police. After receiving representations from BSQ the respective Police Rape and Serious Sexual Offences (RASSO) units involved on review decided to take no further action in both cases. Both clients retain their good character. Neither was required to return to the UK to face questioning. D was represented by Roger Sahota and E by Patrick O’Hanlon.

Client F, a qualified medical professional was accused of sexually assaulting a colleague whilst at work in a medical facility. F approached BSQ to assume conduct of his case post-charge. The CPS rejected BSQ’s representations in writing that there was no realistic prospect of conviction. The case proceeded to trial in the Crown Court. F was acquitted by unanimous jury verdict and retains his good character and his medical licence. F was represented by BSQ partner Roger Sahota.

Client G, a teacher at a prestigious private education establishment was accused of a historic allegation of sexually assault by penetration. G approached BSQ to take over his case after he was charged as he was unhappy with his previous lawyers. Rejecting written representations from BSQ that there was no realistic prospect of conviction the case was listed for jury trial. Three weeks before trial, and in light of new material disclosed to BSQ case the CPS were asked to review their position. A decision was taken by the Crown to offer no evidence. G retains his good character and was represented by BSQ partner Roger Sahota.