Supporting Young People to Challenge Guilty Pleas
Today (26.06.2024) our lawyers attended the Youth Justice Legal Centre seminar - Supporting Young People to Challenge Guilty Pleas. We thoroughly enjoyed the seminar and deemed it essential to develop our expertise in supporting young people in the criminal justice system. Here are some facts, that our lawyers took away from the day:
1. A lot of children
plead guilty when they are not for various reasons ranging from trauma and anxiety - wanting the process to be over as quickly as possible or, to protect others due to being involved in exploitation such as sextortion. Lawyers must be aware of this and ready to identify the potential needs of the child and experiences they are going through in order to provide the best representation.
2. Procedures in the Youth Court make it more difficult for a child to vacate their guilty plea at a later stage, and it is therefore crucial that your lawyers have a deep understanding of the options available to children and how important the initial stages of an investigation and court proceedings are, and how they differ greatly to proceedings involving adults.
3. It is a
widely perceived misconception that a no comment interview prevents a youth from dealing with a matter by way of an out of court disposal. It is possible to have a case diverted out of court, even where a no comment interview has been given.
4. There are many reasons children and young people give no comment interviews at the police station, here are a few:
- Lack of trust in the system
- Lack of disclosure from the police
- The child has been exploited
- Special educational needs
- Do not understand the process and available defences
5. In some instances, particularly where the above is identified it can be in the best interests of the child to say no comment, to preserve their interests moving forwards - this approach would not bar the child from disposal that could be offer at the investigation stage to be offered later on.
7. It would be best practice for your lawyer, if any of the above points are identified, that they are set out in a prepared statement during the interview so the lawyers concerns are recorded.
8. Lawyers are not trained as part of their general legal qualification on how to deal with youth trauma and specifically, how to take instructions from children or to identify red flags, such as exploitation. Being represented by lawyers who have undertaken additional training to their qualification is hugely beneficial to ensure the child receives the best outcome and right treatment throughout the justice system.
9. Many children and young persons do not understand the impact of a guilty plea would have on their future and criminal record. They quite often reach adulthood and only then experience the difficulties caused by the decisions made when they were a youth.
10. A Referral Order is recordable and will be disclosable upon a criminal record check, is therefore not necessarily the best outcome for a child.
11. Due to the time it can take for a child to open up to their legal team the case can often be at court. If it is evident at this stage that they have educational needs or there are special points to be considered about the offending the child's legal team must seek to have these addressed. It may change the view of the prosecution, or it could divert the case back to the police for the matter to be resolved in a different way.
12. Many children "just follow advice" - sadly it is true that many legal professionals may not understand the implications of pleading guilty and the avenues to be explored with a child before making decisions. Choosing the right lawyer is crucial to getting the correct advice.
Where possible the justice system must not criminalise youths. Defence Lawyers, the courts and the prosecution service must work together to ensure the interests of the child are paramount to the life changing decisions being made.
Our lawyers undertake training with the Youth Justice Legal Centre regularly to ensure we maintain an up to date knowledge of the procedures and practices in place when representing children. The Youth Justice Legal Centre is a centre of excellence for youth justice law and practitioners. We pride ourselves on ensuring that young people are appropriately represented and we understand how crucial it is for lawyers to differentiate between adult and youth proceedings. To speak with one of our lawyers about your case or your child's case, please contact us today on 0161 706 0602 or fill out our enquiry form here.

We Can Help With

Understanding the difference between “consent” and “reasonable belief” can be key if you are being investigated or prosecuted for a sexual offence, where these two issues can arise. These are not just technical legal terms; they are real-world concepts that can affect the outcome of serious sexual abuse cases. At Eventum Legal, our aim is to help people grasp these important ideas so that they know where they stand, whether they’re seeking justice, facing an accusation, or just wanting to be informed. Consent and the Law: What Does It Mean? When it comes to sexual activity, the law makes it very clear that “consent” isn’t just about saying yes or no. Consent means agreeing by choice, having the freedom and capacity to make that choice, and being able to change your mind at any time, even if the sexual activity has begun. The Sexual Offences Act 2003 states that a person consents if they agree by choice and have the freedom and capacity to do so. In practical terms, this means no one should be pressured, forced, or tricked into sex. If someone is too drunk, too scared, or otherwise unable to decide, they cannot legally give consent. This applies also to issues with mental capacity where someone may not have the understanding or ability to give informed consent. When establishing whether consent or reasonable belief applies, the courts examine everything that happened, how the people involved acted, what was said, their relationship, and whether any threats were made. It’s not about just hearing a yes or no, but about whether the agreement was truly given, freely and knowingly, at the time. Reasonable Belief: The Other Side of the Coin While “consent” focuses on the person on the receiving end of sexual activity, “reasonable belief” is about the perspective of the person accused of the crime. UK law says it’s not enough for someone to claim they thought the other person was consenting. The belief that consent existed must be reasonable; it must meet the standard of what a reasonable person would think in those circumstances. This comes down to two questions: did the accused genuinely believe the other person was consenting, and would a reasonable person, knowing what the accused knew and considering everything that happened, have reached the same conclusion? It’s not a defence to say, “I just thought it was okay,” if evidence, actions, or common sense didn’t back that belief up. Courts look at whether the accused checked for consent, paid attention to what was happening, and took steps to make sure everything was agreed upon. How the Law Applies These Concepts The distinction between consent and reasonable belief matters because everyone is responsible for ensuring that consent is present, not just assuming or hoping it is. The prosecution in a sexual offence case has to prove that there was no consent or that the accused did not have a reasonable belief that consent existed. To judge this, courts examine the context: Were both people sober and able to make decisions? Was there clear, positive agreement? Did one person ignore signs of hesitation or discomfort? In cases where someone is very intoxicated or unable to communicate, the law presumes that there is no consent, and it is challenging for anyone to claim a reasonable belief otherwise. However, where alcohol is in question the issue can become complex as we all have difference alcohol tolerances, what may be too drunk to one person, could be different to the other. Therefore, working to establish the intoxication and affect is crucial for lawyers in some cases. In cases where it can be proven that that someone was too drunk to speak or move, and the accused says they thought there was consent just because the person didn’t say “no,” the court is unlikely to accept that as reasonable. The law expects people to check in with their partner, look for positive signs, and stop if there’s any doubt. Clearing Up Common Myths Many misunderstandings exist about how consent and reasonable belief work in real life. One myth is that if someone doesn’t say “no,” they must have agreed. The absence of a “no” is not the same as a “yes.” Another myth is that if two people are in a relationship or have had sex before, consent is always assumed. Every sexual act requires consent, every time. Some people also believe that as long as they honestly thought there was consent, that’s enough. But the law sets a higher bar: the belief has to be reasonable, meaning it must be backed up by what happened and what a reasonable person would think. In our digital age, misunderstandings can easily happen through text or online communication. Courts are aware of this and look at all available evidence, including messages and social media, to determine what happened. Other avenues of evidence exploration can include CCTV footage and witnesses. Why These Legal Standards Matter The way UK law approaches consent and reasonable belief has changed over time. In the past, people could argue they had an “honest” belief in consent, even if it wasn’t reasonable. That changed with the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which now requires honesty and reasonableness. This protects people from harm and ensures that the law takes the experiences and choices of everyone involved seriously. These rules are designed to keep people safe and ensure everyone’s rights are respected. The law encourages open communication, respect, and responsibility. It expects everyone to look for clear signs of agreement and to stop if there is any doubt or hesitation. What To Do If You’re Involved In A Sexual Offence Case Suppose you’re facing a situation involving consent or reasonable belief and you as the accused want to prove that either of these legal requirements existed, then you must seek legal advice and engage with specialist lawyers who can navigate the complexities of the key legal issues in sexual offence cases. These cases can be stressful and complex, and every detail matters: what was said, what was done, and what steps were taken to ensure everyone agreed. At Eventum Legal, we specialise in helping people understand their rights and responsibilities. We listen, explain your options in straightforward language, and support you throughout the process, always with respect and confidentiality. Whether you’re seeking justice, defending your reputation, or simply want to know your rights, we’re here to help. Frequently Asked Questions What is the difference between consent and reasonable belief? Consent is when a person freely agrees to a sexual act. Reasonable belief is whether the accused genuinely and reasonably believed that consent was given, based on all the facts. Can someone be convicted if they misunderstood consent? Yes, if their belief in consent wasn’t reasonable. The court looks at the whole situation, not just what the accused thought. How can I protect myself or prove consent? Open communication and ensuring everyone is comfortable and willing are the safest approaches. If you’re worried about misunderstandings, keep records of conversations. Where can I get help or advice? Contact Eventum Legal for confidential, expert support tailored to your needs.