New Videos – August 2020
Can The Police Lie To You During A Criminal Investigation?
I have had many clients say to me over the years, “Look Mike, the police lied to me , I was in the confession room and they were making up evidence against me , saying there’s this witness and that witness, and they were pointing to empty boxes which turns out to be empty boxes of materials in an attempt to get me talking and a confession and I felt so much pressure, as a result over lies which I thought was the truth that I eventually gave a confession. “
Are the police allowed to lie ? Unfortunately, this is a very accepted technique, that is good policing it happens all the time, it’s one of the reason why you should remain silent. In the face of a police investigation when you are being a accused of a crime, and the police have various techniques including the read technique, is a really clever technique which I covered in a blog, about how to get you talking but one of the accepted tactics is to lie to you, because the case against you is overwhelming , you might as well help yourself out now , you get talking about it , and when that case goes to trial, sometimes there’s no way to kick out that confession and the judge is going to say “ yeah, certainly the police are allowed to lie, you are convicted” So that’s something to keep in mind, and you should always bear in mind, the exercise your right to remain silent in the face of police questioning when you are being accused of a crime or under suspicion by the police. I cover that topic in another blog or video which you should watch as well. So that in a nutshell is the answer to the question, “Can the police lie in interrogation?” Absolutely, they can.
A Critique of the Ontario Criminal Case Management System
I’m really glad you can join me today, my name is Mike Kruse, from Kruse Law Firm, and I am here today to talk to you about a critique of the Canadian or least, Ontario, criminal courtroom remand system. This involves the Ontario Court of Justice and the Superior Court of Justice.
One thing that the COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted is that our remand system, our case management system, in our criminal courts, is completely out-dated, it’s like a nineteenth or twentieth century anachronism, there’s no need for it. And I’ll basically explain it very briefly. In our court system, you get a first appearance, it might be four, three, four five, six weeks after you are arrested, and you show up or your lawyer shows up and says, look, I retained, this person retained me, and I need three or four weeks to report to the crown attorney, and speak to the crown and get disclosure. It’s a completely useless system. Its just a reporting system. You would have to go back to court three to four weeks, and say something along those lines. “Look, I need more time”, or “I need to set up a pre-trial with the judge or a crown pretrial with the crown”. Why do we need this system? We don’t. COVID has highlighted this because our cases are going over automatically, you don’t even have to attend. It’s presumptively that they are going over. What that says to us is “look, we can still do the normal steps, we don’t have to report to a Justice of the Peace every three weeks, we can just report those steps electronically, you are expected to do certain steps, and why do we have to keep going back to court like this? “ I would expect, I really believe, there’s a very good chance that they are going completely scrap our remand system, both in the Ontario Court of Justice level and the Superior Court of Justice level. Superior court of Justice is called assignment court. Again, it’s useless there in my respect of opinion and there’s other ways and means of doing it. For example, defence counsel and crown counsel could just be expected to complete the normal steps, let’s say three to four months, and send an electronic message,.“ Look , we completed the steps, we’re ready to set a trial date”. If the steps are not completed, then perhaps the judge could say, well let’s have a manage, let’s have an appearance, so you need to explain why this is not completed. It’s very simple, we don’t need to go to court every three to four weeks, and wasting time and particularly during COVID and particularly forever. This is something that should have been dealt with years before. And I can tell you this, there’s certain jurisdictions in the states, including the federal court system where they don’t even have remand appearances. You don’t need this reporting system, we’re in the twenty-first century now, let’s report electronically and do the normal steps in the file. Steps in a file are not done in the court room they are done outside of the courtroom and have been had this critique for many years, that COVID has really highlighted it for us in the Justice system. So I hope the Ministry of the Attorney General does the right thing, and gets rid of it so we don’t waste time every three to four weeks in going to court.
Are Virtual Criminal Trials A Viable Option?
I wanted to discuss a very interesting issue today and that is whether having a virtual trial that is a trial by Zoom or Skype, JVN technology, where witnesses are testifying remotely whether that’s a viable option for you, whether the court system is moving towards that and whether it’s effective or whether you should resist and try to you know, have an in person trial.
First of all, in Canada, we have an absolute right to an in person trial. So you don’t have to agree to a virtual trial. Now, what’s happened during the COVID pandemic is our court system, the Ontario Court of Justice, the Superior Court of Justice, the Ministry of Attorney General, has spent a lot of money on modernizing our courtrooms, and they’ve made virtual trials an option. Their have been a few that went on and I can tell you this, a lot of criminal defence counsel are very resistant in the province, and there’s competing arguments on both sides. There’s pros and cons’ to that. Some of the competing arguments are this, “well how, how can you effectively cross examine the person via video hook up, how can the judge access their demeanour, the way they are coming across, could they be coached by someone else in the room, could they be reading notes”.
I can tell you what my experiences with virtual trials and virtual preliminary hearings, I’ve had many virtual preliminary hearings where witnesses testify from across the, different provinces, and I have found frankly no disadvantage I felt that I was able to effectively cross examine the witnesses, it was very clear that they weren’t being coached and very clear that they were not reading notes and you can examine their demeanour. It was quite, surprisingly effective in my view. I’ve also done trials. Under our system, if it’s a child witness under eighteen they can potentially testify via closed circuit TV even today, and you have, that’s an application, I found that very effective too. The witness is in another room; they are there with a support worker. I found actually young people more forth coming when I wasn’t in the room, I was able to gleam more information from them. So I tend to be in the pro camp for this. There’s very early returns on this. There’s been a few virtual trials. Not a lot of counsel are agreeing to it yet. You do not have to do that. I may have some client’s that say to me “ yeah, I want a virtual trial, I would do that, absolutely, I would do that” . I would say this “even though I am quite open to it, that I think it could be a good thing, I don’t want to be the guinea pig, I want to see how other trials proceed and get some feed back from other people”. But sometimes we can be closed minded at things without thinking it through just because we are soo use to something. But with the technology we have today, why couldn’t a virtual trial work, it’s something to consider, at least, and again, my advice to a client right now would be “No, I wouldn’t agree to that, you have a right to an in person trial, let’s see how it goes, I’m going to speak to other lawyers, see how it goes in the province and go from there”, and there be some studies done about that but to put your head in the sand and say this can’t work, I don’t’ think that’s the right idea and of course, I may be wrong. It may turn out that some of these negatives are in fact negative, that has not been my experience on the virtual cases I have done in the past. That’s available for preliminary hearings by the way and that’s also available for young people, even in normal times. So those are some of the issues that have emerged in the COVID-19 pandemic in our court system with modernization. I know that the Ministry of the Attorney General are encouraging people to consider virtual trials, but another option, even if you, like the negative about the virtual trials, the potential negative is cross examining witnesses and seeing their demeanour and whether we can judge credibility, that is the judge or jury via through a camera. But the thing is, you could do certain aspect of the trial virtually quite easily which don’t depend on demeanour. For example, there’s opening argument, there’s closing argument, to a jury or judge alone, there’s pretrial motions or evidence that’s not called, there’s submissions. So there’s all sorts of things that whether could be a combination of virtual and not virtual and I think most defence counsels are not open to that. So you either run into one camp, you’re saying, “ I’m on the pro camp, for virtual trials, or I’m in the con camp, but I think most people in the pro camp, like me, well I don’t want to be the guinea pig , it’s not going to be my client that goes first, let your client go first” so anyways, it’s going to be a very interesting up coming months, and years in the criminal justice system as we modernize and to see what extent virtual trials take place, and whether in fact they are good and viable options and make no difference whether it’s in person or not in terms of your odds of being able to successfully challenge the credibility of a witness.
Can A Criminal Lawyer Represent Multiple Co Accused?
A very common situation in criminal law is where police charged multiple co accused with the same crime. For example, a drug case, where they find multiple people in the same car, they don’t know who had possession of the drug, multiple people in the same house during a search warrant. A client comes to me and they say “Mike, you know, my wife and I were found in this car together, um, can you represent both of us?” Well it really depends, let’s say that there’s four people in the car, both the husband and wife were saying the drugs wasn’t ours, that it was the driver, and they are both saying that. Well, technically would not be a conflict of interest and a lawyer technically could represent both the husband and wife as long as that story doesn’t change. Sometimes the conflict of interest could occur at some point later. For example, the wife says,” no, no the drugs were my husband’s”. So it’s always a bit touchy situation, to take on co-accused. That would be one where you could. Our firm, I am not saying we never take on a co-accused but we’re very careful about it. We have to access each individual situation. We have to make sure there’s no conflict first. The way we do that is that we only represent one initially, get disclosure, review it carefully with them and make sure there’s no conflict and perhaps we might be able to represent the husband in that situation. Now, there’s other touchier situations where there is no conflict, yeah you can represent two but it may not be in the best interest because it’s a very complicated factual situation. Like a , you know very complicated factual situation, say a fight on the golf course, involving multiple parties, so now you are cross examining at trial for two people , it becomes messy in your mind to sort things out. Who you are helping in any one given time, even though both of your clients are saying the other four golfers were the aggressors. So you have to be careful I wouldn’t recommend a criminal lawyer take on many co-accused cases, maybe there are cares that are okay to do it, many not, but I can tell you this, there’s soo many examples of conflict of interests where you can’t and again, that would be an example, the car, where say there’s four co-accused, a man in the car says “the driver had, was in the possession of the drugs”. The man wants to retain me, well I can’t represent the driver because we want to point the fingers at the driver.
So, conflict of interests occurs at the outset of criminal law. They can also develop during the course of the trial, so that becomes a messy situation too. Two people paid a lawyer all this money, and a conflict occurs in the middle of the trial. A trial gets mis-tried and put over and where do you go from there. So you have to be very careful as a criminal lawyer, and you have to understand the law of conflicts very carefully. So that’s the short answer of when not you can develop a , you know, a conflict and whether a lawyer should actually consider taking two co-accused on. The bottom line the lawyer has to be very careful, and do the right thing. It sometimes doesn’t pay to take two co-accused on even though there’s no conflict.
Can A Lawyer Represent A Couple On Domestic Assault Charges?
Our firm represents many men and woman who are charged with domestic assault. You know, a fairly common situation does occur and this person comes to our office and it’s a husband and the wife and they say “Mike, I would like to retain you to represent me in domestic assault, my husband’s also been charged because the police had a hard time sorting out who is the aggressor so they charged us both, can you also represent my husband because we want to work things out and get these charges dropped. We are talking about getting back together, even though we are not supposed to talk due to our bail conditions”. And I say to them, “ No, that’s the very, probably one of the clearest example of conflict of interest. I can only your interest, I can’t represent your husband because he’s charged with assaulting you. You are charged with assaulting him, I’m here to help you, I’m not here to help your husband, who am I helping in that situation. I can really help neither. It doesn’t work out that way. So that’s a clear example of conflict of interest, you can retain me, the wife, or the husband as the case may be, and your husband has to go and get another lawyer.
Now a common situation, and I’ve seen this happen, perhaps it’s an inexperience lawyer, who meets with both couples, or gives advice to both couples, that lawyer’s also already in a conflict, they shouldn’t represent either. So we are very careful that way. If the wife or husband calls us first, that’s the person we can represent, and no other. So that’s the very , a common situation in criminal law, and that’s how it should be handles. Both should have their own independent lawyer representing their best interests.
Do I Need To Hire A Local Criminal Lawyer?
I want to talk to you a little bit today about how whether virtual courtrooms and virtual technology really make it necessary to hire a local criminal lawyer and I want to give you the example of our offices. For example, we have multiple physical locations and lawyers and staff. We’re located in Toronto. Lawyers in Toronto, staff members. Kitchener, London and Windsor. So we’ve always operated locally and happy to operate locally in those cities but we’ve also serviced all of the other areas in between. Smaller counties like Woodstock, Walkerton, Simcoe. You know, bigger cities like Hamilton and we’ve never felt at a disadvantage in doing that. We’ve been able to, well first of all those locations are within striking distance of each of our offices.
There’s always been this feeling a lot of people and it is propagated by the criminal bar, and I used to be one of those people who felt this way frankly when I was a younger lawyer that oh it’s better to hire locally. You know your lawyer knows the Crown Attorneys more, knows the local Judges, etc. We never felt at a disadvantage frankly working in any of those counties. In fact I’ve found our success rate in out-of-towns at least as good if not better than our local. You know, there was no problem there. Of course some clients wanted to have a local lawyer so they wouldn’t retain us. They would retain someone else but now things have changed. You see we have, our firm has this, we have virtual technology in the province. People don’t want to meet in person. The courts are going virtual. Right now we are doing virtual out-of-custody guilty plea, virtual bail hearings. A lawyer in Toronto can operate in Windsor quite easily and very good lawyers in different cities can operate anywhere.
Is there an advantage to knowing the local Crown’s? Well if there was ever that, I think at one time there was that you know, a bit of a myth that there’s an old boy’s network that you get deals if you know the lawyer. If ever that existed, I’m not saying it ever did, that’s all gone. You know Judges like to sometimes see a refreshing face in Crown Attorneys and again our firm’s had a very good success rate. So you can even do trials virtually right now.
So that’s what’s going on. It’s not necessarily a good thing for local lawyers. It’s not necessarily a good thing for our firm because our main offices are local but we don’t propagate that message. I don’t say hire us because we’re local. I say hire us and compare us to other law firms and make your decision based on your budget because we can operate anywhere in the province effectively right now including doing virtual trials, virtual guilty pleas and this is probably not going away. The pandemic is probably going to be here for a while unfortunately. The court system’s changing. It’s modernizing and I would expect for example the remand system is going to be done away with or go virtually. Virtual guilty pleas are here to stay and virtual trials may be here to stay as well. Very simply hire the best lawyer you can find within your budget whether that be local, and that may be a local lawyer or it may not be and that’s the message I want to give to you today about what’s going on with the new virtual reality that’s been caused by the Covid-19 Pandemic.
Does Kruse Law Firm Charge For Travel Fees?
When we meet with a new client, we will meet with them and provide them a free consultation and we’ll provide them with exact quotes for our legal fees. So first of all we quote a down payment. It’s called a retainer. That’s a certain amount of money to start the file. We will quote if the matter resolves that means by way of guilty plea without setting a trial date, withdrawal, peace bond. So in other words, you’re not heading to trial. There is a block fee quote. So you know exactly what you are getting into and then we will quote for a trial as well. So if you don’t do a plea there is further fees in addition to the retainer to proceed to trial. So you’ll know exactly what you’re getting into. We don’t charge hourly rates and there’s a reason for that. You can watch another video I’ve commented somewhat negatively on hourly rates. I don’t believe it’s a good thing to get locked into hourly rates with a lawyer for various reasons. You’re going to know exactly what you are getting into, your exact quote and you can decide to retain us or not.
Now a question that clients often ask me are there travel fees outside, we have multiple locations across the province and we travel to areas within a range of those locations and most of those counties are within you know 30 minutes, an hour, 2 hours, sometimes as much as 4 hours from where they are located. We don’t charge travel fees. Our fees are common across central, western and southwestern Ontario which is our main region and we don’t charge travel fees and we do cases even father than that at times we do take on cases across Ontario frankly. So that’s the answer. We don’t charge travel fees. We charge block quote fees so you know what you are getting into. There’s certainty. You’re fees are not going to be more than those block quotes as opposed to the uncertainty of oh my god hourly rates of four or five hundred bucks an hour that some criminal lawyers charge. How do you know when it ends? You have no idea the time estimate. You should strive for certainty with quotes and that’s what we do at our firm.
Does Kruse Law Firm Offer A Free Initial Video Consultation?
I want to talk to you today about Kruse Law Firm’s free initial video consultation. If you check out one of my other videos I go through in detail what’s involved in our consultations and they’re free. It’s no cost or obligation to you. One of the issues really that the Covid-19 pandemic has highlighted is the new virtual reality we’ve been living in. Our firm has always had the ability to have zoom and skype consultations with people and we’ve been doing this for years and we’ve been very active with it during these times. Many clients want to do this. They don’t want to meet in person. It’s safer and it really works out well. It’s really as if you are there and it allows us to meet with all of our clients including in counties that are outside of our physical locations. Our physical locations are in Windsor, London, Kitchener and Toronto but we also act for people in all of the counties in between. So this is the service we provide. Our consultation is usually in the range of 30 to 60 minutes and we’re going to give you a lot of good advice and it will almost be as if you are there really which we’ve been finding is great and clients like it so that’s what’s involved in our free initial video consultation.
How Long Can The Police Keep My Electronic Devices?
Our firm represents a lot of clients. They come to our office and they’ve been charged with a particular crime and as part of the investigation the police have seized their electronic device. Their laptop, their iPad, their computer, their cell phone because the police want to do a further investigation to see if there’s evidence which supports and proves the crime in addition to the other evidence they have and they’ll ask us you know “will I get this back? I mean these are expensive devices, I’ve got an expensive computer. Will I ever get it back?” The answer to that really depends on a) whether the police find something of help to them in solving the crime, in proving the crime or b) the nature of what’s found on the computer.
So let me give you an example. They are going to search, they have to get a search warrant by the way to open the devices and search. They’re going to do that after they seize it. Go before a Judge or Justice of the Peace to get a search warrant, doing a forensic analysis of the computer or look for whatever they are looking for whether it’s Facebook threatening messages, whether it text, whether it’s harassing messages or things like child pornography if it’s a child pornography case. So it really depends. So if they find things like Facebook and text messages which support harassment, they are going to need that evidence for the trial if you go to trial and you’re not going to get that computer back perhaps until the end of the trial. You’d probably get it back in that scenario at the end of trial because the computer probably wasn’t used as a crime itself in a sense like child pornography you’re using the firm to search your child pornography, that type of person who is found with child pornography, they’re not going to get their devices back. Obviously in fact they’re going to if they lose their trial, they’re going to be prohibited from using a computer any way and they’re not going to get that one back. If they don’t find anything on the computer obviously they’ll give that back within a reasonable time period. So either you’re going to get it back soon, you’re going to get it back sometime after the trial or you’re never going to get it back depending on the situation. So that’s the short answer to those particular questions. It really depends on the facts of your particular case and we can help you with that, answer that question if you come to our office.
Mutual & Consensual Physical Fights
I want to talk to you today a little bit about mutual physical fights. That is where two people agree to engage in fisticuffs or a wrestling match or a fight of some sort and this sometimes can occur between husband and wife of course and clients of mine will get charged, whether it’s the man or the woman that’s accusing them of assaulting them and they will say look it is a mutual fight. We consented. We were slapping each other or grabbing or punching each other. We both started at the same time and it was both consented to or two people on the street for example or two people at a bar and the client says “is that a valid defence?” It’s not self-defence because it was agreed to. You’re not defending yourself. The short answer to this question is sometimes it’s a defence and sometimes it’s not. It is a defence if you didn’t cause any injuries to the other person. They didn’t suffer any bodily harm, for example. You are allowed to engage in a mutual fight if there’s no bodily harm and that’s a case called Jobidon, R. v. Jobidon which is a higher court decision in Canada.
Now if there is bodily harm and bodily harm by the way unfortunately has been defined at a very low level. I’ve seen bruises be defined as bodily harm even minor bruises. Some Judges will even bend over backwards if they’re really minor to say that’s not bodily harm but I’ve seen it. Certainly anything beyond bruises is clearly bodily harm. So the bottom line it’s not a defence if you’re causing injuries in that regard defined as bodily harm under the Criminal Code.
So it’s not like the mutual fight, one assault cancels out the other either. It’s not like it’s just going to go away. So the way to defend that type of charge is not necessarily by mutual. It wasn’t mutual or consented it if was bodily harm. We have to plead guilty. The only way to defend that type of charge is if it was truly acting in self-defence.
So that’s the law of consent and bodily harm when it comes to mutual fights. Whether it’s a husband and wife, intimate partners or strangers in a bar for example and that can be troubling for some people because a lot of people are under the impression that you can engage in a fight. It’s a mutual fight, cause a black eye and just walk away. Well not if the guy, person, man or woman calls the police. You’re going to be charged with an assault under our Canadian Criminal Code and you would likely be convicted unless it was in self-defence.
What Difference Will Hiring A Criminal Lawyer Make?
During our free initial consultation clients or perspective clients will often ask me “Mike should I even hire a lawyer? Will it make a difference?” and there’s an old adage, I love old adages but there’s a particular apt one for that. A self-represented accused has a fool for a lawyer. That is so true. It’s impossible to effectively represent yourself in the criminal court system.
Even one of the highly experienced lawyers such as the criminal lawyers at our law firm, if they found themselves charged with a criminal offence they would absolutely try and find the best criminal lawyer around to defend them. It’s impossible to effectively negotiate the best negotiated plea on your own. It’s impossible to effectively represent yourself at trial and cross-examination, cross-examine a witness. It just doesn’t work and particularly even for a criminal lawyer it wouldn’t work. For someone who doesn’t know the criminal justice system it would be an absolute disaster. So it does make a huge difference. It makes a huge difference in terms of the leniency you might receive on your sentence and negotiations. It makes a huge difference about the odds of you winning a trial. I can’t even imagine a person attempting to defend any criminal case. It’s so technical, you know every aspect of criminal law is technical. DUIs are technical. It just would be a complete disaster. So that’s the short answer to that.
We can take your stress away. We can alleviate your pain in that regard. We can effectively represent you in court. Get you a lenient sentence and potentially win your case but certainly maximize the chances of doing all of those things including hopefully winning your case and that’s what we do and that’s why you need to hire the best criminal lawyer you can find within your budget.
What Is Involved In A Free Consultation?
I want to talk to you today about what is involved with our free consultation at Kruse Law Firm. You come to our office, you phone us, you’ve been newly charged with a criminal offence and you want some information and you’re reaching out to us because we offer that free consultation. What is involved in that process? Well first of all we will meet with you whether it’s on the phone, whether it’s in person or zoom or skype and we’re going to go through the nature of your charges with you, we’re going to review the law with you, go through your version of events and receive what you say is alleged by the police or the alleged victim as well. We are going to receive all that information from you. You know, basically go through some strategies, all of the court process A to Z and what you can expect in the court system and also discuss with you some common defences, how you might be able to defend this particular charge.
People are often looking for a very firm opinion during that initial consultation and that’s really impossible to provide. Sometimes we can give you some ideas or hints about your case and I’ll give you an example, let’s say it’s a domestic assault charge and you’re telling us there’s no injuries, you acted in self-defence and your wife has a certain version of events or your husband does than you do. I can tell you this, I can probably safely give this opinion that those cases always start out at at least a 50/50 percent chance of winning if not higher. So there’s an example where we could give a tentative opinion but the real legal opinion’s impossible to provide you until we receive all of the police reports, the videos of the alleged victim, the police notes and statements. It’s called the disclosure. It’s a package of materials it can range from even on a minor case 50 to 100 pages up to even literally up to literally 1000s of pages in more complicated conspiracy or drug case or murder case. Until we receive that disclosure we can’t really give you a particular legal opinion but we can really point you in the right direction, make you feel comfortable with what you’re getting into if you decide to retain us, know what our role is and know where we’re headed and we can also give you some ideas about range of sentence if you decide to plead guilty but many of our clients claim they’re innocent and want to have trials but that’s if you decide to plead guilty.
So that’s what’s involved in a free consultation. The thing is about it, I analogize it to going to a doctor. When you go to a doctor and you discuss symptoms they can give you some general ideas about it but they really can’t diagnose it as serious symptoms in many cases until they send you for blood tests, x-rays, MRI’s. That’s kind of an analysis to the police reports. We are only able to receive a little bit of information. We need the complete information before we give you a firm legal opinion after you retain us. Our consultation takes place anywhere from 30 minutes to 1 hour. You’re going to receive a lot of information. We are also going to provide you with quotes for legal fees and you can decide to retain us and if you don’t at least you have some good guidance and information to go on your way and either represent yourself or decide what you’re going to do with your criminal charges.
What is Kruse Law Firm’s Success Rate Winning Criminal Trials?
Our clients often ask me “Mike what is Kruse Law Firm’s success rate winning criminal trials? You know when I first started practicing law about 30 years ago I heard an adage from a senior criminal lawyer and he said to me “Mike the definition of a good criminal trial lawyer is as follows: you win almost all of the cases that you’re supposed to win, on 50/50 type cases you win the vast majority of those and on some cases where you have absolutely no business of winning a good criminal lawyer can even pull out a win there.”
The point is criminal law is a vast spectrum of odds of winning. When we get your police reports, we review your version of events, we will be able to give you an idea of what your basic odds of winning. See criminal law breaks down to certain ranges of winning. There are some cases that are completely unwinnable. You’ve confessed to 3 police officers, there are 8 witnesses that you beat someone up. There’s a crow bar at the scene and there’s DNA. There’s no chance at winning that case. There’s some cases that fall into a range of well there’s a lower probability to win. We might win it with some good luck. There’s 50/50 cases. There’s hey looking pretty good or there’s close to slam dunk cases.
The point is as well, if a lawyer says to you “look I never lose cases”, they are either a) lying to you or b) they don’t do criminal trials. Many good criminal lawyers including our firm we sometimes take on very hard cases to win. The client says they’re innocent, there’s a low odds of winning and we sometimes pull out those cases but those cases are easily lost. We have already given the opinion that you don’t stand much of a chance but sometimes we get lucky there. A good criminal lawyer can sometimes pull out those cases. In 50/50 type cases say it’s a domestic assault a he said she said case, no injuries or even minor injuries and the client is claiming self-defence, they haven’t confessed to the police, it’s one witness against the other, a good criminal lawyer in that case can invariably often win those cases at a much higher rate than 50% because those cases the burden of proof is in his client’s favour, there has to be proof beyond a reasonable doubt and it’s a difficult burden for the Crown. On higher range cases we rarely lose those types of cases but those cases are not guaranteed. Again a good criminal lawyer would lose a good slam dunk case even 1% of the time. It happens, things go wrong. We can’t make any guarantees in that regard. We have former criminal prosecutor’s here, we’re very experienced lawyers. We do the full range of criminal law and we do hard cases, we do 50/50 cases, we do pretty good cases that have a good chance of winning and slam dunk cases and I will put our lawyers’ track record up with other criminal lawyers in the province who are at the same level and they have a very good winning track record as do I over the last 30 years. So that’s basically what our success rate is. It’s good. We’re here for you. We are going to do the best we can. We are either going to win your case or we’re going to get the best result we possibly can.
What Is The Kruse Law Difference?
During our free initial consultation many perspective will ask me, “Mike, what will you or your lawyers do differently than another law firm? Why should I hire your firm as opposed to another law firm?” Well first of all, we have several former prosecutors. Criminal prosecutors and drug prosecutors who work for our firm. I myself am a former criminal prosecutor so I have the mindset of a prosecutor in a sense that I can put my mind into the strategy that they’re thinking. That’s a very helpful asset. We put the client first. The client’s needs, the client’s goals are number one in our mind. That’s client centric approach to our firm. We have constant communication with our clients all well. Hard work is number one like skills and experience which we have, 30 years I’ve been at this business that only takes you so far. You can’t just rely on skills and experience. It’s hard work. It’s preparation. It’s detail and let me give you an example from myself and our other lawyers and I’ll compare us to other law firms in this regard. When we get a client ready to testify, say at a domestic assault, sexual assault, a dui case, we spend hours with that client. Mock questioning in-chief examination, mock cross-examination, correcting them, you know, using their personality and their version but we show them how to testify properly because that’s an art form. People don’t just get up on the witness stand, whether they are truthful, whether they are lying or somewhere in between and sound good. It requires preparation by the lawyer and this is what our law firm does. Fees, I can tell you this, obviously we are in business and we are here to make money but fees are probably the last thing on my mind when I am doing a criminal case. If you do good work with hard preparation, you have a client centric approach, you are here to win cases as hard as you can for a client and negotiate the best possible result. The fees follow and the reputation follows. That’s what we will do differently than other criminal law firms and that’s why you should hire Kruse Law Firm.
What Types of Criminal Charges Does Kruse Law Firm Handle?
I want to talk about what type of criminal charges Kruse Law Firm handles. First of all, our firm completely restricts our practice to handling any type of criminal case or impaired driving. So that’s the full gamut of cases under the Criminal Code, Narcotics Controls Act and other Acts in Canada which are criminal acts. There are certain offences for example under the Customs Act which are criminally related. We have done this area of law for over 30 years and it’s all we do. All of our lawyers. We don’t do any other type of law other than this area and that runs the full gamut so you’re talking crimes of violence like assault, aggravated assault, assault causing bodily harm, any type of sexual crime, domestic assault, property offences, drug offences and of course one of our focuses is on impaired driving by alcohol and impaired driving by drugs. Coincidentally approximately 15 % of criminal charges in Canada are impaired driving offences if you can believe that a little known fact. This is what we do. We have very experienced lawyers in this regard and in fact we have former criminal prosecutors. I’m a former criminal prosecutor myself when I started my career and we have former drug prosecutors. This is what you need. If you’re hiring a criminal lawyer , you’re charged with a criminal offence, you need to find a lawyer who restricts their practice to this specific area and is experienced doing the specific type of crime that you’re involved in because not all lawyers handle for example impaired driving cases, just as an example but we do the full spectrum. We are here to serve you and we are going to do the best we can to either win your case or get the best result possible in court.
Will Mike Kruse Be My Lawyer?
During our free initial consultation we quote clients for legal fees and clients will often ask us if I’m doing the intake or one of our staff members or lawyers and say “Will it be Mike Kruse who’s doing the trial or guilty plea or resolution or will it be one of the other experienced lawyers?” and what we do is we quote differential rates. All of our lawyers are very experienced lawyers, very capable lawyers and have winning track records. My particular legal fees for doing a trial are higher than the other lawyers. So if you choose to pay those higher rates you can get me. If you choose to pay the lower rate for the other lawyers you will get one of our other experienced and highly capable lawyers. I might add you will be in very good hands with them. So this allows our clients sometimes to work within a budget. Sometimes they frankly cannot afford my legal fees so we try and work within a budget by having differential rates. So that is one of the benefits of going to our firm as well, that we do have differential rates but any route you go with our firm whether you have me do your trial or resolution or whether you have the other lawyers you are going to be in good hands. You’re going to have a lawyer that’s experienced that restricts themselves to only doing criminal law and impaired driving cases and has a good winning track record at getting great results for their clients.