Cell site expert – helps BSB client secure acquittal 
R V CNC & others
The jury found our client not guilty after a trial in which the prosecution alleged that he and four others wearing masks entered residential premises and threatened the documents with a knife.
The prosecution used evidence form his mobile phone to demonstrate at around the time of the incident, not only was he in telephone contact with his co accused but also he was in the proximity of the incident.
In order to challenge the inferences sought by the prosecution in respect of this technical evidence, BSB solicitors instructed an expert to assist counsel with analysis of the evidence and in turn the preparation of cross-examination of the prosecution expert.
During the trial we were able to demonstrate that the assertion made by the prosecution with regard to the proximity of the phone to the crime scene was unsound. Further that it was more likely that the phone was located where our client had asserted that he was in at the time of the robbery when he was first interviewed by police. The prosecution expert conceded this point when, during cross examination, his attention was drawn to the location of other calls made shortly before the incriminating call which engaged a cell site that pointed away from the scene of the crime and towards the location where the defendant had said he had remained at. Due to the geographical position of the opposite facing cell site and the results of the radio survey detailing the coverage of each cell site, it was clear that there was insufficient time between the calls for The Defendant to have made his way to the area proximate to the crime scene as claimed by the prosecution.
The careful analysis of this type of evidence proved to be key in terms of the challenge to the prosecution case before the jury and our client was acquitted.
Our Jim Skelsey had conduct of this case and instructed Mr Paul Lazarus from 25 Bedford Row at the trial at Maidstone Crown Court.
