Court-annexed mediation (CAM)

To the newbie lawyer who just agreed to take up the defense of an accused where the evidence of guilt against him is very strong (per your own assessment), I just want to say you are not alone in handling a case where there is 99% probability of conviction of your client.

I had a case where my client (“AA”) is accused of Theft (shoplifting) and the act was captured by the store’s CCTV cameras and the stolen items were found in my client’s bag. Immediately after having been caught in flagrante delicto by the store’s security personnel, AA was turned over to the nearest police station and, since it was Friday night, AA was forced to spend the night and the following Saturday, Sunday and Monday in jail with other detainees.

After hesitantly agreeing to accept AA’s case on a Friday night, I immediately went to the store the following day and tried to settle the matter with the store officials by offering to pay whatever amount the store owner would demand as payment for the stolen items. Unfortunately, the store owner refused to settle and has firmly decided to teach AA a lesson by sending AA to jail.

Having been born in this world as a “sinner” and trained in law school to “find fault,” I looked for technical loopholes in the manner of the arrest conducted upon AA - from the civilian arrest by the store’s security personnel to AA’s booking at the police station and subsequent detention at another detention facility in some other police station to the inquest proceeding conducted by the public prosecutor on the next working day and to AA’s transport to the hospital for physical/medical examination. I found several violations of AA’s substantial and procedural rights.

I filed a Motion to Quash based on those violations of AA’s rights. Eventually, the court denied my motion for being a prohibited one, noting that the violations of my client’s rights are not proper grounds for a motion to quash. Nonetheless, it conveyed a message to the store owner that if they push through with the case, I intend to raise those violations all the way up to the Supreme Court, if AA gets a conviction in the lower courts. Surely, the Supreme Court will overrule a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt if the accused’s procedural and constitutional rights were violated in the process, no matter how guilty he or she may have been.

The case was then set for the required court-annexed mediation. I expected a rock-hard No-to-Amicable-Settlement position of the store owner’s representative during the meditation, but to my surprise, he told the hearing officer that he was instructed by his principal to enter into an amicable settlement with my client. The hearing officer was sure happy to hear it (and so were me and my client!).

After the Compromise Agreement was signed, the store owner’s representative issued an Affidavit of Desistance and my client paid the settlement price. Thereafter, the court dismissed both the criminal and civil aspects of the case.