Cases

A selection of the matters we have defended, including murder, modern slavery, people smuggling, complex fraud and coercive control.

These cases have been done by solicitors working at MLC but not all with MLC, as MLC's criminal department has only been in effective existence from November 2024.

R v TM

The defendant was charged with the importation of controlled drugs. Following a detailed review of the evidence, the defence presented a comprehensive case to the prosecution demonstrating that she had been the victim of a sophisticated and complex scam. Rather than being knowingly involved in the offending, she had been manipulated into unwittingly participating and was, in reality, an innocent party. While proceedings were ongoing, the defence also successfully secured the Defendant's release on bail to Ireland, an outcome that is rarely granted in cases of this nature due to the inherent flight risk associated with international bail. This enabled the client to return home while the case remained under review.

R v Tulloch

The defendant was charged with murder following an allegation that he fatally stabbed another individual during an altercation at a barbecue. Following the defence presented at trial, the defendant was acquitted of murder and convicted instead of the lesser offence of manslaughter. This represented an exceptional outcome, as cases involving fatal stabbings are frequently prosecuted as murder, and it is particularly challenging to secure a reduction in the charge where the prosecution alleges an intention to kill or cause really serious harm.

R v MS

The defendant was one of fourteen individuals charged in connection with a large-scale "crash for cash" fraud investigation. Following the trial, the defendant was acquitted of all charges. Of the fourteen defendants prosecuted in the case, the defendant was the only individual to be acquitted, representing an outstanding result in a complex multi-handed prosecution.

R v AW

The defendant was originally facing 13 charges, including 3 counts of controlling and coercive behaviour and various assaults. We were able to get 9 charges dismissed, leaving allegations relating to one complainant only. Ultimately, the prosecution offered no evidence in relation to the remaining allegation, and the proceedings did not continue. We drafted several defence statements that were extremely lengthy. The first one was 17 pages, the addendum was 29 pages, the second addendum was 38 pages. After most charges were dropped another defence statement was required, which was fifty pages long, followed by a further addendum of six pages. You will not find this level of service anywhere else.

R v PE

The defendant faced 23 counts of people smuggling relating to allegations that individuals had been trafficked from Nigeria to the UK. As part of the defence case, private investigators were instructed in Nigeria to carry out enquiries into the circumstances surrounding the alleged victims. Those investigations uncovered evidence that some of the individuals could not have been trafficked in the manner alleged by the prosecution. Having spent approximately 18 months on remand while maintaining her innocence, the defendant was ultimately acquitted of all 23 charges, representing a significant result in a complex and serious prosecution.

R v Josephine Iyamu

This involved a landmark prosecution under the Modern Slavery Act. It was the first case of its kind in which a UK resident was prosecuted for offences committed between Nigeria and Germany, reflecting the extraterritorial reach of the Modern Slavery Act. The defendant was convicted after a four month trial.

SFO v David Justice

The Defendant was acquitted following a six-month Serious Fraud Office trial. The case was notable as the first of its kind in which a deferred prosecution agreement with the Serious Fraud Office resulted in criminal charges being brought. The case involved just over half-a-million pages, which were all meticulously studied. The defendant was found not guilty.

R v AD

The firm successfully defended the Defendant facing charges of controlling and coercive behaviour after persistently seeking disclosure of crucial telephone evidence that had not initially been provided. Once the evidence was obtained shortly before trial, it was reviewed over the course of a weekend, revealing messages that undermined the prosecution's case and demonstrated that the client could not have been guilty of the alleged conduct. It was shown that the complainant was the one that was controlling and coercing him. Following representations to the prosecution based on this evidence, the Crown reviewed the material and discontinued all charges before the trial commenced on the Monday morning.

R v RG

The Defendant faced multiple allegations, including assault, harassment, and criminal damage, arising from a highly contentious domestic relationship. Throughout the proceedings, the defence maintained that the Defendant was herself the victim of sustained domestic abuse and that the allegations failed to reflect the wider circumstances of the relationship. The defence presented evidence demonstrating that the conduct relied upon by the prosecution, including repeated telephone calls to her former partner, occurred in the context of him withholding access to their child after arranging contact and subsequently refusing to answer the door. By placing the allegations within their proper context and challenging the prosecution's account of events, the defence successfully secured not guilty verdicts on all charges.

R v Doyle

The defendant was charged with murder arising from a high-profile incident in Windsor. It was noted that the murder could be seen from the Queen's bedroom. As part of the defence, a unique forensic approach was adopted by instructing an expert to assess the defendant's handedness. The expert concluded that, while not impossible, it was highly unlikely that the defendant, who was right-handed, would have inflicted the fatal injuries using his left hand, as alleged. Despite the defence strategy and extensive efforts made on the defendant's behalf, the jury ultimately returned a guilty verdict.

R v MG

The defendant was charged with murder, accused alongside others of throwing an individual into the River Thames on New Year's Eve. Following a trial, the defendant was acquitted of the murder charge and found not guilty of the most serious allegation. The jury convicted him only of the lesser offence of violent disorder.

R v Lisa Richardson

The defendant was charged with murder alongside two co-defendants. Despite the defence team's best efforts, the client was convicted and sentenced to 34 years' imprisonment. The case was particularly challenging due to the serious nature of the allegations which included torture of the victim in front of young children.