John is a barrister practising in criminal law and all related areas. He is building a strong Crown Court practice representing defendants charged with a variety of serious criminal matters including fraud, money laundering, violence and sexual offences.
He is experienced in defending and prosecuting a range of proceedings arising from the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 including restraint and confiscation, cash forfeiture, and account freezing and forfeiture hearings.
Instructing solicitors have observed that John goes the extra mile in cases involving young and vulnerable people. He places great importance on caring for the lay client throughout their case whether they are a business professional or a vulnerable person.
“We have been impressed by John’s preparation, client care and advocacy. It is clear he has a keen eye for detail. We have full confidence in his ability to do a fantastic job for our clients.”
Feedback from one of John's instructing solicitors
John holds Developed Vetting ("DV") Security Clearance.
Direct Public Access
John accepts instructions under the direct access scheme. This allows members of the public to instruct John directly to advise them on or represent them in suitable cases.
“You have been amazing ... thank you for your friendly, expert, caring and sincere help. You did a fantastic job.”
Feedback from a direct access client acquitted in a drink driving related case
Professional panel appointments
- SFO Proceeds of Crime and International Assistance - C Panel (2020 - 2024)
- CPS Specialist Proceeds of Crime Panel - Level 2 (2020).
- CPS Specialist Fraud Panel - Level 2 (2020).
- CPS General Crime Panel - Level 2 (2018).
Prior to joining chambers, John worked as a paralegal for two years at Hickman & Rose Solicitors. During that time John assisted Jenny Wiltshire in various cases concerning manslaughter, gross negligence manslaughter and historical sexual allegations.
- BPP Law School, BPTC; Very Competent.
- BPP Law School, GDL; Commendation.
- University of Warwick, BA (Hons.) History; 2.1.
- Ann Felicity Goddard Scholarship, Gray’s Inn (2017).
- Secretary of the Criminal Bar Association (2020-22)
- Criminal Bar Association (Exec Committee 2018-20)
- Young Fraud Lawyers Association.
- London Irish Lawyers Association.
John’s principal area of practice is defending individuals facing criminal allegations. He defends in the most serious cases including cases of:
- Allegations of violence including s18 GBH and violent disorder;
- Sexual allegations including cases concerning rape;
- Firearms, drugs and charges connected to alleged organised crime;
- Money laundering, complex fraud and acquisitive crime.
"He is articulate and quick on his feet during a trial."
Feedback from an instructing solicitor
John has worked on cases with clients ranging from high net worth individuals to very vulnerable young people. John undertakes serious cases in the youth court. He has completed the vulnerable witness training course.
“John's cross examination of the main prosecution witness was impressive.”
Feedback from John's instructing solicitors on a case of section 18 GBH with a Certificate for Counsel in the Youth Court
John is regularly instructed in the magistrates' court to defend criminal matters on a privately funded basis. He accepts instructions in driving matters and has successfully defended a number of individuals facing drink driving and related charges.
John considers communication with instructing solicitors as vitally important and aims to provide a professional service to his clients. Before joining the Bar John developed significant experience in litigating criminal cases as a paralegal. He enjoys engaging with instructing solicitors throughout a case to achieve the best result for the lay client.
John is regularly instructed in account freezing and forfeiture cases. He has been instructed by individual respondents and by HMRC. When instructed for respondents John uses his knowledge of law enforcement’s approach to investigating these orders to assist individuals and companies facing these orders. He has recently been instructed to:
- Advise and represent a former European politician under investigation for bribery in relation to a freezing order in excess of €1.5 million.
- Act for HMRC in a contested application to extend an account freezing order worth in excess of £500,000 while an investigation into an alleged fraud committed overseas continued.
- Advise and represent a corporate accused of money laundering in an account freezing order in excess of £160,000.
- Act for HMRC in a contested account freezing order relating to a suspected MTIC fraud.
"His knowledge and experience of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 is, in my experience of working with him, second to none."
Feedback from an instructing solicitor in a contested account freezing order case
“John provided a comprehensive case strategy... he demonstrated excellent witness handling skills and advocacy to achieve an excellent outcome... I trust his judgement.”
Feedback from John's instructing solicitors in a cash forfeiture case
John accepts instructions in confiscation matters. He has defended in confiscation hearings in the Crown Court where he has achieved significantly reduced orders for his clients. He is instructed to defend in section 10A POCA and section 22 POCA applications. John accepts instructions in enforcement proceedings in the magistrates’ court.
John is instructed by HMRC in contested and ex parte applications for production orders, POCA disclosure orders and search warrants. He has been instructed by defence solicitors to review and analyse documents in cases concerning:
- A FCA and DOJ investigation into a banker accused of circumventing internal controls and fraudulently allowing sovereign-backed loans (valued at $2 billion USD) to be taken out and sold to investors.
- A detailed LPP review for a corporate client responding to a production order in a case connected to an alleged fraud against a sovereign wealth fund.
- An executive officer of a FTSE 100 company accused of being involved in accountancy fraud.
During his time as a paralegal John was part of the team who represented the first LIBOR trader to be exonerated by the FCA's Regulatory Decisions Committee. John also spent time as part of the team who defended a Barclays’ derivatives trader charged with conspiracy to manipulate LIBOR.
John is instructed in serious and complex prosecutions for the CPS. He is currently instructed by CPS Serious Fraud Division as a led junior on a £1.6 million boiler room fraud. John also prosecutes for local authorities where he draws on his knowledge from a 4 month secondment to a local authority legal team.
John has been instructed to advise on and act in private prosecutions brought by individuals. He is experienced in the private prosecution of trademark and copyright offences. In his role on the CBA executive John drafted a response to the consultation on the Code for Private Prosecutors and written evidence on private prosecutions to the Justice Select Committee.
John has an interest in developing a practice defending individuals before a range of regulators.
John has been instructed by the Metropolitan Police to undertake a disclosure review of highly sensitive material, some pertaining to national security issues, for a police misconduct hearing. The case concerned the undercover operations of the Special Demonstration Squad SO12 and the alleged inappropriate sexual relationships between undercover officers and activists. The case has received significant press attention.
John accepts instructions in relation to Public Inquiries and Inquests.
John was instructed as disclosure counsel to the Grenfell Tower Inquiry for 8 months. He was also instructed as disclosure counsel to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA).
Cases of Note
Op Cornflour 
Led junior, led by Dominic Connolly. Successfully prosecuted a £1.6 million Boiler Room Fraud at Southwark Crown Court. The trial concerned allegations of conspiracy to defraud and launder the proceeds of the fraud. The fraudsters sold non-existent investments in payday loan companies, cryptocurrency and pharmaceutical companies to vulnerable victims. The trial lasted for over 3 months. Convictions secured for all 3 defendants on all counts.
Serious Youth Crime
R v T 
Junior alone. Youth court case with certificate. 4 handed gang rape of a 13 year old. All defendants aged between 12 and 13. Prosecuted by counsel +20 years call. Co-defence counsel for D2 and D3 +20 years call. Prosecution forced to offer no evidence on day 5 of trial. Application for non-conviction restraining order successfully resisted.
R v LM 
Junior alone. John successfully defended an 18 year old of good character where CCTV showed the defendant slashing at an undercover police officer with a zombie knife over a foot in length. John recognised the symptoms of PTSD in the defendant and obtained an expert report. Defendant acquitted of attempted s18 GBH, attempted wounding and being in possession of an offensive weapon.
R v B 
Junior alone. Youth court case with a certificate. A spate of robberies on taxi drivers and school children. Vulnerable witnesses gave evidence at court. 11 offences charged. John successfully had 4 dismissed at half time. The defendant was convicted of 1 offence after trial. YRO with ISS imposed. CBO application withdrawn by CPS after John made submissions that it was unlawful.
R v X 
Junior alone (certificate for counsel). John represented an 18 year old of good character in the youth court. X was accused of attempted s18 GBH and s20 GBH. The trial lasted for 4 days. Following John's written and oral submissions of no case to answer the attempted s18 GBH was dismissed at the close of the prosecution case. John's client was acquitted of s20 GBH.
R v ZY 
Junior alone. Section 18 GBH. Z who was just 18 years old at the time of a stabbing. The prosecution asserted that Z had attended the property of a drug dealer and stabbed him in the back after he made threats to a 14-year-old co-defendant over a drug debt. A 3 handed trial, and the first and second defendants ran a cutthroat defence, blaming Z for the stabbing. Z gave evidence stating he could not recall having a knife with him and was unable to explain how the complainant suffered his injuries, including a “defensive” wound to the hand and a stab wound to the back. John’s client was found not guilty.
R v AX 
Junior alone. John secured an acquittal for his client charged with sexual assault. AX was of good character. The trial lasted 3 days and the jury acquitted John’s client after 45 minutes. Defence costs order granted.
R v AA 
Junior alone. AA was first on the indictment charged with s18 GBH in a two handed cut throat. The second defendant blamed AA entirely. Prosecution witnesses recalled AA delivering numerous kicks and punches to the complaint. AA was also alleged to have held a weapon to the complainant’s face. The complainant suffered a brain haemorrhage, a skull fracture necessitating the removal of part of the skull and ongoing memory issues. Following careful cross-examination and jury speech AA was acquitted of s18 GBH with intent. Convicted of s20 GBH, as was the co-Defendant. Sentenced to 33 months, which is below the guideline starting point.
R v DF 
Junior alone. DF was arrested on the street with a taser which was allegedly disguised as a torch, a machete and a stab proof vest. DF was charged with s5(1A) Firearms Act offence subject to the statutory minimum 5 year sentence. Following representations drafted by John the CPS amended the indictment, charging a s5(1)(b) Firearms Act offence instead. DF was also charged with possession of an offensive weapon. Following extensive mitigation DF received a suspended sentence.
R v GP 
Led junior (led by Queen’s Counsel) in case concerning allegations of sexual assault and false imprisonment before the case was discontinued by the prosecution. Defence costs order granted. Continued to be instructed in claim for wasted costs against the CPS.
R v M 
Instructed direct access for a defendant charged with being drunk in charge of a motor vehicle. Following a letter of representations and an argument regarding disclosure failings the CPS offered no evidence. Defence costs order granted.
R v F 
John's client entered a guilty plea to being drunk while in charge of a motor vehicle. John persuaded the court not to impose penalty points; the lay client was concerned on the effect of penalty points on his work and work insurance. The court imposed a short disqualification and a small fine.
R v TL 
John successfully defended a former soldier accused of failing to provide a specimen of breath when required to do so. TL suffered from PTSD as a result of his tour of Afghanistan. The prosecution disputed the defence medical evidence. Defence costs order granted.
R v N 
John's client was acquitted of failing to provide a specimen of breath when required to do so. John cross-examined police officers at length and adduced expert evidence to show that N suffered with anxiety. Defence costs order granted.