Joseph maintains a busy practice across the full range of general crime, including cases concerning serious allegations of violence, drugs and sexual offences with a particular practice specialism in human trafficking & modern slavery and organised crime.
In addition to his defence practice, Joseph appears on the CPS External Advocates list at Grade 2 and has appeared in cases concerning serious violence, fraud, drug trafficking offences and serious sexual offending. Notably, Joseph has appeared for the Crown as disclosure counsel in relation to the prosecution of one of the largest modern slavery networks uncovered in the United Kingdom.
Whether prosecuting or defending Joseph seeks to work closely with those who instruct him from the outset. Described as “undeniably efficient” Joseph is known by Solicitors for being meticulous in his approach and as bringing a “…fresh technical perspective…” to cases he has been instructed upon. In addition to taking on cases in his own right, Joseph has both been led formally and on an informal devilling basis within the Crown Court and Court of Appeal.
Outside of his practice in Court, Joseph regularly receives instructions to advise on appeal, in relation to both out of time appeals to the Court of Appeal and applications to the Criminal Cases Review Commission. Much of Joseph’s work in this area involves advising on appeal for potential victims of human trafficking who have been convicted of offences committed in the course of their exploitation. Within his advisory practice, Joseph has advised on cases concerning serious sexual offences, serious violence, and drug trafficking offence.
Prior to joining Furnival, Joseph was a paralegal to one of the leading human trafficking and modern slavery lawyers, during which time he worked on preparing appeals against conviction for victims of trafficking / modern slavery who had been convicted in the course of their exploitation.
Crown Court:
R v K, 2024 [Birmingham Crown Court] – Instructed as Junior Counsel for the Defence post-conviction to represent K alongside Leading Counsel in a complex multi-handed conspiracy concerning class A drugs and firearms.
R v B, 2024 [Newport (IOW) Crown Court] – Prosecution counsel for a case concerning a Defendant accused of supplying cocaine having been collecting drugs from the mainland and transporting them to the Isle of Wight for ongoing distribution.
R v R, 2024 [Northampton Crown Court] – instructed defence counsel post-conviction in a multi-handed conspiracy to supply Class A drugs. Joseph was instructed to represent one of the Defendants who had pleaded guilty to importing in excess of 50kg of cocaine into the country and possession of a bladed article.
R v D, 2024 [Southwark Crown Court] – Defending in a case of possession of a bladed article. The Defendant was acquitted unanimously by the jury in under an hour.
R v A, 2024 [Kingston-upon-Thames Crown Court] – Defence Counsel instructed to represent a defendant at trial in respect of three counts of possession with intent to supply class A drugs. The Defendant had previously pleaded guilty to simple possession of class A drugs. A was ultimately sentenced to an absolute discharge for two charges of simple possession. The Crown offered no evidence in relation to all three counts of PWITS A.
R v N, 2024 [Central Criminal Court] – Joseph was instructing to represent his client in relation to confiscation proceedings following their conviction for conspiracy to supply Class A and Class B drugs. Whilst N had entered guilty pleas to the conspiracy charges, significant evidence concerning his involvement in the conspiracies was heard from himself and other co-defendants in relation to an earlier trial for murder. Complex arguments were advanced in relation to N’s role within the conspiracy, evidence, and judicial findings. The case resolved with a very considerably reduced benefit figure and nominal order.
R v C, 2024 [Bournemouth Crown Court] – Instructed prosecution Counsel in a case concerning assault occasioning actual bodily harm and non-fatal strangulation.
R v R, 2024 [Harrow Crown Court] – Instructed as Defence Counsel to represent a Defendant accused of s 18 wounding at trial.
Op Fort – Instructed Disclosure Counsel for the prosecution in relation to the prosecution of one of the largest modern slavery networks uncovered in the United Kingdom.
R v B, 2023 [Aylesbury Crown Court] – Instructed for the Crown in relation to a committal for sentence on serious charges of causing serious injury by dangerous driving involving multiple complainants. This case involved complex legal arguments regarding the appropriate use of s 66 of the Courts Act 2003 the correct procedural errors and facilitate an appropriate sentencing outcome.
R v J, 2023 [Guildford Crown Court] – Instructed defence Counsel in a case concerning the causing of serious injury by dangerous driving arising from a driver colliding with a pedestrian at an illegal drifting event. Following detailed submissions in mitigation the Judge was persuaded to pass a suspended sentence.
R v B, 2023 [Oxford Crown Court] – Prosecution Counsel instructed for trial in relation to a single count of dangerous driving.
R v F, 2023 [Croydon Crown Court] – Defence counsel on an appeal against conviction from the Youth Court. The Defendant had been convicted as part of a group that committed an assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Following a two-day trial, the appeal was allowed, and the conviction quashed with the Court acquitting on both principal and accessory liability bases.
R v P, 2023 [Portsmouth Crown Court] – Prosecution Counsel for a third strike domestic burglary and witness intimidation. The jury returned after approximately one hour unanimously finding the defendant guilty on all counts.
R v K, 2023 [St Albans Crown Court] – Prosecution counsel in a case concerning offences under s 35 of the Malicious Damage Act 1861 and s 34 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. Joseph was commended by the Judge for the comprehensive sentencing note prepared to assist with an unusually complex sentencing exercise for a defendant with complex learning difficulties.
R v H, 2023 [Snaresbrook Crown Court] – The Defendant was jointly charged with two others for possession with intent to supply Class B drugs and possession of an offensive weapon in a private place. JB was to prepare an application to dismiss. On consideration of the argument, the Crown did not contest the application and offered no evidence in relation to all charges.
R v O, 2023 [Swindon Crown Court] – Defence Counsel instructed to represent a Defendant at sentence on a complex multi-handed conspiracy to supply class A drugs.
Magistrates’ Court:
R v B [Milton Keynes Magistrates] – A case concerning an assault of an emergency worker in HMP Woodhill. The case was discontinued by the prosecution following a series of disclosure requests and an oral s 8 application.
R v T [Ealing Magistrates] – Listed for a two-day trial in the Magistrates’ Court, the Defendant was acquitted following the calling of a defence witness who supported a submission of self-defence.
R v P [Milton Keynes Magistrates] – The case was dismissed following a successful submission of no case to answer on the basis that the Crown had failed to adduce evidence of all the elements of the offence.
R v E [City of London Magistrates] – The Defendant was acquitted after trial of charges relating to assaulting an emergency worker and criminal damage. Following the careful presentation of the Defendant’s case, the Magistrates accepted a defence of self-defence in respect of the allegation of assault.
Youth Court:
R v XX [Stratford Youth] – a contested trial involving two charges of assaulting an emergency worker. Following the late identification of communication issues, Joseph successfully applied for an adjournment in order to explore an intermediary report which was subsequently granted for the full duration of the trial. Following representations to the Crown, the charges of assault were discontinued against XX.
R v YY [High Wycombe Youth Court] – Instructed to represent a 17-year-old charged with a single charge of s 18 GBH. The Defendant was acquitted following a submission of no case to answer on the basis of a lack of evidence pertaining to intent.
R v ZZ [Brighton Youth Court] – Instructed to represent a 17-year-old charged with multiple charges concerning the supply of Class A drugs. Joseph was instructed in this matter due to his expertise in relation to modern slavery and criminal exploitation.
BSc Criminology & Criminal Justice – Birkbeck, University of London
MA Forensic Linguistics – Cardiff University
LLM QLD – Birkbeck, University of London
Child Criminal Exploitation Course – Hull University
Bar Vocational Studies – City, University of London
Middle Temple (Safford Scholar)
Criminal Bar Association
DELF