Top Serious Crime Barrister

Jim Sturman QC is the first choice for clients accused of the most serious criminal offences. His ranking as a top criminal barrister reflects his expertise in the field, and he is widely considered to be amongst the best barristers when it comes to cross examination and trial advocacy.

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 QC 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.

R. v. J

Appeared for care worker prosecuted in relation to alleged child abuse whilst working at a care home, heard in Liverpool Crown Court. (Part of “Operation Care” and linked to the R v Dave Jones case).

R. v. Volker Kappler EWCA Crim 1224

Did not act at trial, conviction quashed on charges of kidnapping and blackmail.

R. v. Abdulla

Acted for Bilal Abdulla charged with the “Tiger Tiger” and Glasgow Airport bomb attacks. October to December 2008

R. v. Darren Williams

Acted for one of the jockeys tried on allegations of “race fixing” at the Central Criminal Court in the Autumn of 2007.

R. v. Raja and others

Acted for IR at trial and on appeal in Terrorism Act offences brought under section 57/58 Terrorism Act. Conviction quashed on appeal, case reported at 2008 EWCA Crim 184, 2008 WLR (D) 51. 2007/2008.

R. v. Kelly

Appeared for Defence. First appeal on the “two strikes” mandatory life sentence. Drafted submissions to the CCRC and the case was referred back to The Court of Appeal after those representations had been considered. Life sentence quashed and the U.K. Government subsequently settled the European Court action.

Next Posts Previous Posts