Voluntary Police Interview for Sexual Assault – No Charge

The Client & Initial Overview

Kang & Co Solicitors were instructed to represent Jake (name changed for confidentiality), an IT sales consultant, in relation to an allegation of sexual assault contrary to Section 3 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003. Jake had been contacted by the police and required to attend a Voluntary Interview Under Caution at Maidenhead Police Station.

The allegation arose from an incident in September 2025 at The Ivy restaurant in Windsor. The complainant alleged that Jake had asked abrupt and aggressive questions, sat directly next to her, commented on her appearance by calling her “beautiful,” and repeatedly stroked her back without her consent. She reported feeling significant distress and disclosed to a member of staff this alleged incident. The police also indicated that CCTV footage of the incident was available.

The Importance of Early, High-Quality Representation

Although Jake could have been represented by the free duty solicitor under the legal aid scheme, he chose to instruct Kang & Co Solicitors on a privately funded basis. He fully appreciated the potential long-term impact of a sexual assault allegation on his professional career, personal reputation, and private life, as well as the potential risk of a custodial sentence if prosecuted and convicted.

Jake viewed private criminal defence representation as an investment in securing the best possible outcome at the earliest stage. He wanted a senior and highly experienced lawyer to advise and represent him. As a result, Mr Manjinder Kang personally took conduct of the case. Jake’s instruction was formally confirmed on 17 November 2025, at which point the firm immediately notified the investigating officer that Kang & Co Solicitors were instructed to safeguard Jake’s legal rights during the interview.

Case Preparation and Legal Strategy

Following the instruction, the firm obtained pre-interview disclosure from the investigating officer to understand the specific nature and scope of the allegation, including the complainant’s account and the existence of CCTV evidence. This allowed Mr Kang to provide detailed and tailored legal advice to Jake in advance of the interview.

During a comprehensive telephone conference, Jake was advised on his legal options for the police station interview. In light of the circumstances and the available disclosure, Mr Kang advised that Jake should adopt the strategy of providing a prepared statement, rather than answering police questions in an open interview. This is a recognised and legitimate approach where it is in the client’s best interests to control the manner and scope of their account while still placing their position on record.

A detailed prepared statement was then drafted based on Jake’s instructions. Jake carefully reviewed the document, ensured it accurately reflected his account, and signed it in advance of the interview.

Representation at the Police Station

The voluntary interview under caution took place on 26 November 2025 at Maidenhead Police Station. Mr Kang attended with Jake and represented him throughout. Consistent with the agreed strategy, Mr Kang read the prepared statement into the record on Jake’s behalf. Jake did not answer questions beyond the contents of that statement, thereby ensuring that his position was clearly set out while minimising the risk of misunderstanding or misinterpretation under the pressure of questioning.

Because Jake attended on a voluntary basis, he was not subject to police bail conditions at the conclusion of the interview. The matter was left for the investigating officer and the Crown Prosecution Service to review the evidence and determine whether any charge should be authorised.

Outcome – No Further Action (NFA)

On 23 December 2025, Kang & Co Solicitors received formal confirmation from the investigating officer that the case had been recorded as “No Further Action” (NFA). This meant that the allegation of sexual assault would not proceed to charge and would not be prosecuted in court, despite the complainant’s strong desire for Jake to be prosecuted and despite there being material (including CCTV) available to the police.

As a result, Jake avoided:

• The stigma and publicity often associated with sexual offence proceedings
• The risk of a criminal conviction and potential custodial sentence
• The stress of multiple court hearings and a contested trial
• The substantial additional legal costs of Magistrates’ Court or Crown Court proceedings, including barrister’s fees