HEAD OFFICE: DOCKLANDS BUSINESS CENTRE, 10-16 TILLER ROAD, LONDON E14 8PX
BRANCH: STEVENAGE BTC, BESSEMER DRIVE, STEVENAGE, HERTFORDSHIRE SG1 2DX
020 7199 6375
Please select a category from the menu above.
We successfully defended G, who was accused of being involved in the importation of 2 million fake cigarettes from Eastern Europe. The case was prosecuted by HMRC. The investigation relied on the shipment of goods through a Company that appeared to be legitimate. The case also rested on CCTV.
The Defendant was acquitted at Trial
R V C, Southwark Crown Court, 2016: Conspiracy to steal
The defendant was accused of being part of a 100 hundred strong gang who frequented designer stores in central London stealing thousands of pounds worth of designer clothes.
The case rested strongly on CCTV evidence from various stores in London. The defence instructed a leading CCTV and facial mapping expert to prove that the identification was incorrect.
The CPS discontinued the case before Trial and the Defendant was found not guilty
R V B, Chelmsford Crown Court, 2015: Theft from Employer
The case involved a cash in transit courier, an employee of G4S. The Defendant was accused of stealing in excess of £800,000 whilst delivering cash to banks and retailers.
The Defendant maintained that on the night before the incident gunmen forced their way into his home and threatened to hurt his family unless he delivered the next day's takings to a specific location. On the day in question the Defendant carried out his duties as normal, collecting cash, before driving to a remote layby and pushing bags with cash out of his vehicle.
The Prosecution alleged that the Defendant was not a victim of crime but, in fact, was the perpetrator.
The case involved a lengthy and complex forensic investigation with the assistance of G4S. The Prosecution sought to completely discredit the Defendant's version of events. The Prosecution claimed that the Defendant could not have dropped the money at the location he gave to the police due to discrepancies in his story and the time log on the van's tracking system. They asserted that he had lied about the location to throw the police off guard, to enable his accomplices to make off without detection. The evidence relied on included numerous pages of the tracking and GPS data from the G4S van, as well as expert reports and a video reconstruction of the incident.
We instructed our own security expert which was able to completely undermine the manner in which the data had been collated, interpreted and presented by G4S. A psychologist instructed by us was able to refute claims made by the Prosecution regarding the Defendant's behaviour and inconsistent accounts after the event.
The case received national media attention. Following a two week trial the Defendant was acquitted by the jury.
R V T, Old Bailey, 2015: Banking Fraud
This was a complex and sophisticated fraud involving numerous individuals that was extensively investigated by the City of London Police.
Some of the illegal monies had been transferred from organisations who had received fraudulent emails detailing a change of bank account from a purported supplier. Some monies had been obtained via high value cheques stolen in transit. For example,one of the transactions alone amounted to £143,000.The monies were subsequently filtered through numerous accounts to avoid detection.
The Defendant was accused of knowingly receiving fraudulently-obtained monies in her account. The Prosecution sought to rely on thousands of pages of bank transactions and data to prove their case. The defence were able to demonstrate that the Defendant did not have the requisite knowledge or suspicion regarding the origins of the monies and therefore was not guilty of the alleged offence.
The defendant was acquitted after a 4-week trial.
R v D, Southwark Crown Court, 2016: Banking Fraud
This was a complex banking fraud involving transferred funds amounting to several million pounds. Bogus shelf companies were created with the intention of defrauding major banks out of significant sums of money. False invoices and emails were sent to the banks which resulted in the monies being transferred electronically. One transaction alone amounted to nearly £4 million pounds.
The Defendant faced five counts of Fraud. Due to the representations made to the CPS we managed to limit the role of our client through a basis of plea and negotiate a guilty plea to one count of fraud. The remaining counts of fraud were not proceeded with.
Trading Standards -v- T, Harrow Crown Court, 2015: Counterfeit goods
We successfully defended T who was accused of flooding the country with fake electrical goods from China whilst working in her capacity as a Company director . The case involved a lengthy investigation by the Trading Standards Department of Brent Borough Council into trading and financial activities of T. We assisted T in the preparation of the case and ensured that a not guilty verdict was recorded.
R-v- O, Central Criminal Court (The Old Bailey), 2014: Fraud/murder
This case involved an allegation of fraud following a murder of a lonely single woman in the West End. The aftermath of the murder lead to a major and extensive fraud that run in to hundreds of thousands of pounds. Numerous defendants were accused of stealing the identity of the deceased in order to deprive her of her assets. This included transfers of significant sums of money through banking and mortgage fraud. The Defendant was accused of impersonating the murdered woman to obtain monies. The Defendant categorically denied any wrongdoing and claimed that she herself was a victim of fraud. It was a high-profile case that was extensively reported in the media.
Following a trial, which lasted over two weeks, Our defendant was the only defendant to be aquitted of the fraud.
HMRC-v- K, Central Criminal Court (The Old Bailey), 2013: Fraud
The Defendant was accused of large-scale fraud and money laundering. The allegations related to hacking of HMRC computers, creating applications for fake tax refunds and subsequently diverting funds to bogus bank accounts. It was a sophisticated and elaborate fraud perpetrated by Eastern European hackers. The arrests followed a lengthy surveillance and investigation by HMRC officers.
Due to our representations to the HMRC, however, the case against K was discontinued.
HMRC v I, The High Court, Fraud, Judicial review
This case involved an extensive UK and European investigation by HMRC. It was alleged that the Defendant was involved in a 23 million pound VAT diversion obtain fraud. It was alleged that alcohol was shipped from the UK to bonded warehouses in continental Europe and then shipped back to the UK with duplicate delivery documents. A search warrant obtained by HMRC prior to the Defendant's arrest enabled them to seize material and equipment to be used as evidence.
The defence successfully sought judicial review at the High Court regarding the legality of the search warrant which was subsequently quashed. The result at the High Court was able to restrict the furtherance of the criminal investigation.
R v M, Portsmouth Crown Court, 2015: Conspiracy to steal and acquiring Criminal property
This was an extensive police operation that involved numerous defendants . The case rested on a vast array of evidence including CCTV at numerous locations and a significant amount of telephone and cell site evidence.
The case involved the large scale theft of power tools. Goods valued at approximately £250,000 were seized by Police. The defendant was accused of conspiracy to steal the goods and aquiring Criminal property by virtue of the significant sums of monies deposited in his account.
We were able to secure an acquittal on the day of Trial.
R V E, Chelmsford Crown Court, 2016 : Burglary
This was a serious burglary which involved the theft of numerous goods including high value antiques. The defendant admitted the offence in interview when he was unrepresented at the Police station.
The defence submitted a legal argument to have the interview excluded on the basis that the confession was unfairly obtained by Police.
The CPS discontinued the case shortly before the commencement of the Trial and the defendant was found not guilty
R v I Inner London, : Securicor Robbery
The defendant was accused of a cash in transit robbery. He was found in possession of the monies at a house shortly after the incident, we were able to negotiate a reduction in the charge of robbery to handling stolen goods whilst the co-defendants were all convicted of robbery.
The defendant avoided a custodial sentence.