As one of the largest and most experienced criminal law firms in Canada, Hicks Adams LLP is well-positioned to defend against serious sex offence charges, including possession or distribution of child pornography or solicitation of a minor, often referred to as Internet luring. These tend to be complex cases often requiring a specialized knowledge of online technical issues. Having tried and won many child pornography cases, our lawyers are well versed in these technicalities and are able to provide our clients with the best possible defence against child pornography charges.
Simply being charged with a sexual offence involving a child can result in serious personal and professional damage, and being convicted of such a crime is devastating. As child pornography cases carry mandatory minimum jail terms of 6 months to 1 year, a conviction will land you behind bars. Furthermore, your reputation, your job and your entire life will change. It is critical to retain a skilled lawyer to protect you from the damage a conviction could cause.
The lawyers at Hicks Adams LLP possess the resources and know-how to launch a fearless defence against child pornography charges. We are also sensitive to the delicate issues involved in these cases. We understand that the people who come to us to defend against these charges are rarely criminals. Often, they are people who were curious and went too far, perhaps not understanding the consequences of their acts. They are often not aware that a crime was committed and are shocked when they are charged.
Child Sex Crime Charges Require Careful Investigation
Hicks Adams LLP will draw from our network of experts to examine hard drives, conduct forensic analyses of computers and more. We will gather the facts about what was searched, what was done online and whether there is evidence of any criminal intent. These details will prove critical to protecting your rights and defending your case.
One of the most successful ways of defending against child pornography charges is to challenge the validity of any search warrant that was involved in your case and challenge the way in which the search was conducted. If the police exceeded the scope of the warrant or carried out the search in an unreasonable way, any evidence they collected should not be admitted at trial.