Retired Professional Avoids Prosecution After Common Assault Allegation – No Further Action

When “Paul” (a pseudonym for confidentiality), a 65‑year‑old retired director of a large shopping centre, was contacted by Humberside Police to attend Goole Police Station for a voluntary interview under caution, it was a profound shock. Paul had never been in trouble with the police before. He had no previous convictions, no cautions and had never been arrested. He came from a strong, law‑abiding family background: his late father was a senior, decorated police officer and his mother a nurse.

Paul also lived with diagnosed clinical depression and anxiety. He was on medication and relied on structure, routine and walking his dogs as a way to manage his mental health. The prospect of being accused of common assault under section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 was devastating. From the moment he received the call from Humberside Police, he struggled to sleep, felt constantly sick with worry and could think of little else. The fear of being wrongly prosecuted, branded a criminal in his retirement years and shaming his late father’s memory weighed heavily on him.

For someone in Paul’s position, of previous good character but suffering from serious anxiety and depression, the quality and style of legal representation was not just a technical issue. It was central to whether he could get through the process at all, and whether he would emerge with his reputation and mental health intact.

Why Paul Chose Kang & Co Instead of a Duty Solicitor

When asked to attend a voluntary interview under caution, most people are offered three options: attend alone, accept a free duty solicitor at the station, or instruct a specialist, privately funded firm like Kang & Co Solicitors.

Paul’s background gave him a clear understanding of what was at stake. From his father’s years in policing, he knew that a police interview under caution is not an informal chat, it can be the most important evidential stage of a criminal case. He also understood how the duty solicitor system can work in practice, the solicitor may be juggling multiple clients, may receive only a brief oral summary of the allegations moments before the interview, and may have little time to understand the client’s personal vulnerabilities or craft a tailored strategy.

For a client with severe anxiety and depression, a rushed, last‑minute meeting with a lawyer they have never met before, in a stressful custody environment, is a recipe for confusion and panic. Paul could easily have become overwhelmed, given confused answers, or agreed to things he did not fully understand, purely because of the pressure and his mental state.

Paul did not want to gamble with his future in that way.

He remembered his father’s repeated advice that there is nothing better than a good quality solicitor in your corner. He consciously decided to avoid the duty solicitor route and instead researched specialist criminal defence firms. He chose Kang & Co Solicitors because:

• We are an exclusively privately funded law firm, not constrained by legal aid rates or volume targets.
• We have a strong reputation for representing clients of previous good character facing their first and often only contact with the criminal justice system.
• We are independently recognised in Legal 500 and Chambers and Partners as a leading criminal defence firm, marking us out for quality and expertise.
• He would be represented by a qualified, experienced solicitor specialising in criminal defence and police station work, not simply whoever happened to be on duty that day.

From the outset, Paul saw instructing Kang & Co as an investment in his mental wellbeing, his reputation and his future, rather than a cost to be minimised. Later, he was clear in his own mind that if he had instead relied on a duty solicitor or a more generic firm, the outcome for him could have been dramatically different.

Early Intervention: Taking Control and Reducing Paul’s Anxiety

Once Paul instructed Kang & Co in October 2024, we immediately took steps designed not only to protect his legal position, but also to manage his anxiety and depression as far as possible within the process.

First, we contacted the investigating officer at Humberside Police to confirm that all communication would now go through Kang & Co. This meant Paul no longer had to field calls or letters from the police himself, which could have significantly heightened his anxiety and risked him saying something unadvised.

Second, we made it clear that, unlike many legal aid firms working under intense time and funding pressures, we required written pre‑interview disclosure well in advance of the interview date. In many duty solicitor situations, the first meaningful information about the case arrives minutes before the interview in a side room at the station, a highly stressful setting, particularly for someone with anxiety.

Kang & Co insisted on a different standard. We obtained written disclosure weeks before the interview at Goole Police Station. This allowed us to:

• Create a clear, permanent record of what the police were actually alleging.
• Send the disclosure to Paul so that he could read it at home, in his own time, rather than being confronted with it for the first time under pressure in the police station.
• Arrange a lengthy, structured pre‑interview conference in a calm environment, where his questions could be answered properly and his anxiety could be addressed with clear explanations and a plan.

This early, proactive involvement directly reduced Paul’s fear of the unknown and exemplified the preparation‑driven, high‑quality approach that sets Kang & Co apart from many last‑minute, reactive models of representation.

The Allegation and Paul’s Account: Built into a Careful Defence Narrative

The written disclosure summarised the allegation: on 12 October 2024 at 13:17, the complainant left his home for a routine walk through Howden Marsh, common land off Selby Road. He alleged that during this walk he got into an argument with Paul, and that Paul then assaulted him and threw him to the ground, causing injury. This formed the basis of the allegation of common assault.

At our pre‑interview conference on 21 November 2024, we went through this carefully with Paul. In a setting away from the police station, he was able to take his time, ask questions and process the information without the immediate pressure of being recorded under caution.

Paul then gave his complete account. He accepted being at Howden Marsh with his two dogs, including his larger Labrador. He explained that the Labrador had approached the complainant in a friendly manner and that he had reassured the man that the dog was not aggressive. According to Paul, the complainant then kicked the Labrador, apparently in reaction to the barking. Distressed and protective of his dog, Paul shouted at the man and demanded an explanation. An argument followed.

Paul described how the complainant then moved towards him in a threatening and intimidating manner. Paul, conscious of his own vulnerability and anxious state, began to walk away to defuse the situation. As both moved away, the complainant tripped and fell, injuring himself. Paul’s position was clear: he never touched or assaulted the complainant. Any injury was caused by the complainant’s own fall, not by any unlawful force from Paul.

Because we had time and space, we were able to test Paul’s account, identify the key points, and develop a coherent defence narrative. This is the sort of careful, methodical case development that is extremely difficult if a solicitor meets a client for the first time in a custody suite, with a few minutes to skim disclosure and talk before the interview begins, especially when the client is highly anxious and struggling to process information.

Tailoring the Strategy to Paul’s Depression and Anxiety

Once we understood both the allegation and Paul’s version of events, we had to decide not just what his defence was, but how it should be presented at interview in light of his mental health.

On his account, Paul was not guilty of common assault. However, we knew that this was likely to be a word‑against‑word case, turning on credibility. We also knew that Paul’s clinical depression and anxiety put him at high risk of struggling in an adversarial questioning environment: becoming overwhelmed, losing his train of thought, or inadvertently giving incomplete or inconsistent answers.

A client in Paul’s position, dropped into an interview with only a brief, last‑minute discussion with a duty solicitor, is at serious risk of:

• Misunderstanding questions and giving incomplete answers.
• Saying things out of panic or confusion that can later be misinterpreted as inconsistencies.
• Appearing uncertain or hesitant due to anxiety, which can unjustly damage their credibility.

Kang & Co carefully considered all of this and advised a strategic, client‑centred approach:

• We would draft a detailed, bespoke prepared statement setting out Paul’s full account in a clear, logical and robust way.
• That statement would be read into the record by his solicitor at the start of the interview.
• Given his vulnerabilities and the risk of confusion under pressure, Paul would then answer “no comment” to the remaining questions, in accordance with our legal advice.

This approach allowed Paul’s defence to be placed squarely and firmly before the police, while minimising the risk that his anxiety and depression would lead him to inadvertently harm his own case. It is a nuanced, evidence‑informed strategy that requires time, preparation and specialist expertise, qualities that are often in short supply in high‑volume, legal aid‑driven environments.

We worked closely with Paul to draft and refine the statement. He had time to review it in private, to think about the wording and to ensure it truly reflected what had happened. Only when he was completely comfortable did we adopt it as the statement to be used in his interview.

The Interview at Goole Police Station: Calm Execution of a Clear Plan

On 3 December 2024, Paul attended Goole Police Station for his voluntary interview. Unlike many suspects who first meet their lawyer at the station, Paul arrived knowing:

• Exactly what the allegation was.
• What his legal position was.
• What his prepared statement said.
• What the agreed interview strategy would be.

Immediately before the interview, we held a further conference at the station to refresh his memory, answer any final questions and help manage his anxiety. For someone with depression and anxiety, having a familiar solicitor who already knew him and his case, rather than a stranger he had just met, made a substantial difference to how manageable the experience felt.

Once the interview began, the Kang & Co solicitor read the prepared statement on Paul’s behalf. It clearly set out:

• His denial of any assault.
• His account of the events at Howden Marsh.
• His explanation of how the complainant came to fall.

After that, Paul responded “no comment” to further substantive questions, as had been agreed and advised. This was not a refusal to engage; it was a deliberate, legally robust way of ensuring that his account was on record without exposing him to the risks created by his anxiety and the pressure of questioning.

The result was that the police had a full, clear version of events from Paul to consider, but there was no opportunity for his mental health difficulties to be used against him through mis‑statement or confusion.