Conviction for causing death by dangerous driving quashed as a result of misdirection by trial Judge.
Top Serious Crime Barrister
R. v. MR
Conviction quashed and 18 year sentence for drugs importation quashed as a result of non disclosure of the involvement of a participating informant.
R. v. DD
Conviction for g.b.h quashed on the basis of non-disclosure and an erroneous direction as regards identification. Did not act at trial.
R. v. JS
Conviction for murder quashed on the basis of misdirection by the trial Judge and pressure being placed on the jury, acquitted at retrial.
R v. SL
Jim did not act at the trial. SL’s conviction for murder of her partner quashed and no evidence offered at the retrial on the basis that when analysed the evidence did not in fact disclose a case to answer, the original conviction in the case has frequently been described as a miscarriage of justice.
Hospital order for mother who killed her 3 children
Jim acted for TC who was originally charged with the murder of her 3 disabled children who suffered from SMA in April 2014. The defence of diminished responsibility was made out as a result of expert evidence that agreed TC suffered from a severe depressive illness and pleas of guilty to manslaughter were accepted. On [...]
R v DG and other
Jim acted for a young man charged with murder and manslaughter after a brawl outside a night club where the deceased was killed as a result of a single punch to the side of the neck. Convicted of manslaughter and acquitted of murder.
R v. X
Jim successfully defended X who was charged with offences arising out of the phone hacking enquiry (Operation Weeting) into various executives and journalists at News International. The police investigation in to the scandal – dubbed “Hackgate”, “Rupertgate”, or “Murdochgate” by the press – examined whether employees of the newspaper engaged in phone hacking, police bribery, [...]
The danger of relying on expert evidence in criminal trials
Jim Sturman KC is a leading criminal barrister; in this video he comments to BBC1’s Panorama on the dangers presented by some expert witnesses in criminal trial.
R v X
Jim acted for a businessman cleared of an allegation of murder alleged to have been committed at a party that took place after the “V” festival. Trial January 2013.
R. v. P
Appeared for Defence. Money laundering trial arising out of massive cocaine importation.
R. v. V
Appeared for Defence. £60,000,000 money laundering charges arising out of L.C.B. diversion fraud. Conviction quashed as a result of the non-disclosure by HMRC of a participating informant.
R. v. S
Appeared for Defence. Alleged money laundering for “crime syndicate.”
R. v. Q
Appeared for Defence. £12,000,000 money laundering trial arising out of an investigation into an allegedly “bogus” bureau de change.
HMRC v. X
Jim recently acted for X in a 3 day inter-partes application to oppose a Restraint Order HMRC was seeking against the assets of an individual. HMRC’s application was rejected.
R v. W and others
Search warrants granted to HMRC were quashed by the Divisional Court on the basis that the informations did not disclose “reasonable grounds” to justify the warrants granted by the Crown Court.
Government of the USA v. Newton
Appeared for Defence. Part of the “Howard Marks” prosecution in the USA, acting for a Solicitor alleged to have assisted in a world-wide conspiracy to supply cannabis.
Government of the USA v. Sukharno
Appeared for Defence. Acting for the daughter of the ex-President of Indonesia.
Government of The USA v. Kleasen
Appeared for Defence. Extradition case in relation to 1972 alleged double murder in Texas. Case known as The Texas Chain Saw massacre.
R. v. M
Appeared for male defendant in the “sex on an airplane” case, Manchester Crown Court.