Examples of Work Undertaken
R v CR – Junior counsel for one of 4 men charged with murder involving difficult legal issues of joint enterprise and hearsay. There was very significant amount of material to consider including cell-site and mobile phone data, and a vast amount of CCTV evidence. D was acquitted after trial.
R v SG – Junior counsel in a multi-handed gang related shooting in broad daylight. Complex issues relating to hearsay sought to be adduced by the co-accused arose during the trial. There was also a particularly difficult cut-throat defence run by a co-accused which needed very careful handling and tactical consideration.
R v MW – Defence of a man charged with 5 others on a 42 count indictment with offences including conspiracy to cause/incite child prostitution, conspiracy to rape, and sexual activity with a child. Acquitted of all but one count after trial.
R v GR – Historical sexual allegations against a teacher; acquitted after trial.
R v JG – Man accused of sexual activity with a vulnerable young female within his care at work, careful cross examination involving an intermediary required – acquitted after trial.
R v ND – Junior counsel representing a mother accused of neglect of her son after father inflicted life-changing brain injuries to the child – acquitted after trial.
R v MB – Junior counsel for a man charged with murdering his infant son. This case involved complex issues of causation, and a vast amount of medical expert opinion.
R v RH – Defence of a man charged with 5 others with conspiracy to supply class A drugs, a case involving a wide range of circumstantial evidence and requiring careful cross examination of police officers.
R v MH – Junior counsel for a man charged with joint enterprise murder. This case involved a huge amount of circumstantial evidence and required interpreters for all defendants. At the close of the prosecution case the prosecution accepted pleas to manslaughter.
R v LB – Junior counsel for a man charged with murder. Significant issues of causation involving complicated medical considerations. The case resolved with the prosecution accepting a plea to manslaughter.
R v HA – Mother charged with assault of her 5 year old daughter, a case involving intermediaries and careful cross examination of very young witnesses.
R v HM – Junior Counsel for a young defendant in a case involving an allegation of joint enterprise murder – acquitted after trial.
R v MC – Man charged with historic rape and sexual offences of family member, acquitted after trial
R v JL – Man accused of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, using a pick axe against the complainant and raising self defence, acquitted after trial.
R v SD – Man accused of sexual abuse of family members spanning 30 years.
R v LC – Man accused of armed robbery. This case involved identification by the complainant of the accused whom he knew very well – acquitted after trial.
R v SM – Alleged rape of a young girl in care. Acquitted after trial.
R v SC – D charged with two counts of armed robbery, one count was subject to a successful application to dismiss, and the prosecution were forced to offer no evidence in relation to the second count after defence scrutiny of the forensic evidence.
- Member of the Criminal Bar Association
- North Eastern Circuit