After you’re arrested call Emmersons

If you are arrested for drink driving you cannot delay being tested on the breathalyser at the Police Station by asking for legal advice. Once you have given a sample you can speak with an adviser via CDSDirect.

If you are to be interviewed you are entitled to free legal advice and representation from a Solicitor of your choice. The advice is free if the Solicitor has a contract with the Legal Aid Agency. We have such a contract. All you have to do is to tell the Custody Officer that you want Emmersons Solicitors. We cover Police Stations in Tyne and Wear, North Durham and Northumberland.

If you decide to go it alone or you are charged to Court then do arrange to see us as soon as possible. We will explain legal aid and our private client fixed fees. We cover Magistrates’ Courts in Tyne and Wear, Northumberland and North Durham.

Take Legal Advice
What you shouldn’t let happen is for the Police to convince you that getting us to represent you will cause delay or that getting the Duty is quicker. What you must understand is that the Police don’t care about your interests. They are only interested in a quick interview, your confession and whatever happens in Court doesn’t concern them. Don’t trust the Police to advise you on the law-ask Emmersons instead.

Contact us
You can call 01915676667 or 01912846989 or email or

I also conduct my own teeth extractions
Whatever you do don’t try to deal with the Police yourself. Let Emmersons deal with the Police. Put our contact details in your mobile, have a look at our website and tell the Custody Sergeant ” I want Emmersons Solicitors”.

Here’s a thing: you aren’t entitled to a phone call. You are entitled to have someone informed of your whereabouts when arrested by the Police.
You are entitled to Free, Independent legal advice when arrested and in interview. We will ask for relevant material, challenge (if relevant) your continued detention and above all else work in your best interests.

But the Duty is best? Right?
You don’t need to opt for the Duty. Get Emmersons Solicitors on your side from the start.

Contact Details
Give us a call 01915676667 (South Tyne and North Durham) or 01912846989 (North Tyne and Northumberland).

Emmersons Solicitors-we are here to help you.

What’s 101?

101 is the new national number to report crime that is not so serious. Let’s say that there are children playing in your street. You might be annoyed by what they do. You can report your concerns via 101. What happens if the situation gets worse? Children have a right to socialise, to play, even […]

Is it a crime to swear at the Police

Whether behaviour can be properly categorised as disorderly is a question of fact. Disorderly behaviour does not require any element of violence, actual or threatened; and it includes conduct that is not necessarily threatening, abusive or insulting. It is not necessary to prove any feeling of insecurity, in an apprehensive sense, on the part of a member of the public (Chambers and Edwards v DPP [1995] Crim LR 896). The following types of conduct are examples, which may at least be capable of amounting to disorderly behaviour:

causing a disturbance in a residential area or common part of a block of flats;
persistently shouting abuse or obscenities at passers-by;
pestering people waiting to catch public transport or otherwise waiting in a queue;
rowdy behaviour in a street late at night which might alarm residents or passers-by, especially those who may be vulnerable, such as the elderly or members of an ethnic minority group;
causing a disturbance in a shopping precinct or other area to which the public have access or might otherwise gather;
Section 5 should be used in cases which amount to less serious incidents of anti-social behaviour. Where violence has been used, it is not normally appropriate to charge an offence under section 5 unless the physical behaviour amounts merely to pushing or undirected lashing out of a type likely to cause no more than a glancing blow, minor bruising or grazing. Such conduct may also be classified as disorderly and suitable for a charge under section 91 CJA 1967 in appropriate circumstances.

There must be a person within the sight or hearing of the suspect who is likely to be caused harassment, alarm or distress by the conduct in question. A police officer may be such a person, but remember that this is a question of fact to be decided in each case by the magistrates. In determining this, the magistrates may take into account the familiarity which police officers have with the words and conduct typically seen in incidents of disorderly conduct. (DPP v Orum [1988] Crim L R 848).

Although the existence of a person who is caused harassment alarm and distress must be proved, there is no requirement that they actually give evidence. In appropriate cases, the offence may be proved on a police officer’s evidence alone.

Police officers are aware of the difficult balance to be struck in dealing with those whose behaviour may be perceived by some as exuberant high spirits but by others as disorderly. In such cases informal methods of disposal may be appropriate and effective; but if this approach fails and the disorderly conduct continues then criminal proceedings may be necessary.

In deciding whether a charge under section 5 is appropriate, the nature of the conduct must be considered in light of the penalty that the suspect is likely to receive on conviction.

Where there is reliable evidence that the accused was drunk in a public place at the time of the alleged offence to the extent that the accused had lost the power of self control, a charge of drunk and disorderly behaviour should be preferred where otherwise a section 5 charge would be appropriate.

By virtue of section 31(1)(c)of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 (as amended by the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001), section 5 is capable of being charged as a discrete racially or religiously aggravated offence, refer to CPS Guidance on Prosecuting Cases of Racial and Religious Crime, elsewhere in the Legal Guidance.

Racially/religiously aggravated section 5 is a summary only offence, with the maximum penalty being a fine not exceeding level 4 on the standard scale.

By virtue of Schedule 7 of the Serious Organised Crime and Police (SOCAP) Act 2005, section 5 is capable of being an arrestable offence if the criteria in section 24A PACE (as amended by section 110 SOCAP Act 2005) is satisfied.

Dear Ken

Dear Ken
It all started so well. You said all the right things. Prisons need to be reformed. IPP is a ridiculous sentence that is so under resourced few pass through it as intended.
The Police operate inefficiently as does the entire criminal justice system. The oil in the engine is goodwill and without it little would happen.
You introduced LASPO. This addresses IPP. Little has been done since LASPO given Royal Assent. Why?
The CPS introduced (without consultation) eworking at great expense. So many errors in planning (due to lack of consultation) that paper still has to be used.
Then there’s the Flexible Court Pilots. No consultation there either. Unnecessary in many ways but primarily because there is so little business going through the Magistrates Courts. Courts are being closed. New systems to make management of cases more efficient make cases move slowly. No consultation again.
If you want to effect proper, lasting reform then you and your advisers must lose the prejudice you feel for Solicitors and consult openly about the real problems and real solutions. You and your Ministers surround yourselves with people who will only ever praise your ideas. Myself and colleagues know what works and what doesn’t. Yet you won’t speak to us.
Why don’t you want to engage with those who know how to make the criminal justice system work properly?

Collaborative Law makes sense

Clearly, separating from a partner can be a traumatic experience.

Some clients are willing to take part in a round table discussion (sometimes referred to as mediation) to resolve their differences.

In other situations the hurt felt by one or both parties is so strong that the support of a lawyer is required. The simplest method of utilising a lawyer is to sign up to a collaborative law resolution process. Often this approach can also be cheaper than the traditional litigation approach.

What can drag out the process is where one party for whatever reason is not willing to be collaborative and wants their pound of flesh. Unfortunately there are lawyers who promote such behaviour, even when they are members of organisations such as Resolution.

At Emmersons we work to resolve issues amicably and cost effectively if at all possible.

If you live in Northumberland, Tyne and Wear or County Durham then why not call in to see us or email us at

If you live overseas and you are looking to divorce in England or Wales then we can advise you too. Contact

You can get more information from our webite

Divorce or separation or dissolution does not have to be like the War of the Roses. Emmersons will help you separate in a friendlier way.