R v SG Inner London Crown Court Jun 2018 (Defence Counsel for D1)
Successful submission of no case to answer on behalf of D1 in a 5 handed case of affray. The defendant was accused of taking part in a large street affray involving weapons after confronting a male who had attacked his brother earlier in the day. The defence was one of no participation.
R v DR Kingston Crown Court Mar 2018 (Defence Counsel)
Successful Newton hearing in a case involving grooming/sexual activity with a child under 16 years, breach of a SHPO and breach of a SSO. The Newton was decided without evidence on oath from the Defendant after successful submissions about D’s learning disabilities making him too vulnerable to give evidence. An earlier request for an intermediary had been refused. The defendant was sentenced to a new SSO.
R v KH and WH Inner London Crown Court Jan 2018 (Defence Counsel for D1)
Defence Counsel for the first defendant mother accused of 9 counts of cruelty to a child under 16. Following careful cross-examination of the child witness, the first defendant was acquitted by the jury of all physical assault charges alleged.
R v CT – Central Criminal Court Jan 2018 (Defence Counsel)
Secured the unanimous acquittal of a man accused of possessing an offensive weapon in a public place. The defendant had possession of a metal bar outside his home address and used it to strike two males who had been attacking his house. The defence raised was self defence as a reasonable excuse.
R v BH – Central Criminal Court Dec 2017 (Defence Counsel)
Successfully defended a young woman accused of 5 counts of possessing articles for use in fraud. The defendant was stopped in a shopping centre having attempted to use counterfeit credit cards to buy items of clothing. The defendant averred that she did not know the credit cards were counterfeit. She had been targeted by a group of males posing as a modelling agency. They instructed her to go and buy items as a ‘stylist’ for them. The Learned Recorder presiding over this case has described Shannon’s legal knowledge and advocacy as ‘excellent.’
R v PA – Shrewsbury Crown Court Dec 2017 (Defence Counsel)
Secured the unanimous acquittal after trial of a Ghanaian female accused of possessing an identity document with improper intent and 5 counts of fraud. The defendant was trafficked to the UK and was told by her traffickers that she was here on a student visa. She was supplied with a false home office letter giving her indefinite leave to remain and used it over a 16 year period. The defence advanced was that she did not know the document was false and had not made representations with it that she knew to be false.
R v ME & EE – Canterbury Crown Court Dec 2017 (Prosecution Counsel)
Prosecution Counsel in a two-handed fraud case containing four counts of fraud by false representation. A father and son had led a 3-year campaign of setting up fraudulent accounts with companies such as British Gas, Sky and Southern Water to avoid paying for services. Both defendants were unanimously convicted on all counts.
R v KL – Central Criminal Court Nov 2017 (Prosecution Counsel)
Secured the conviction of a man who continually returned to the UK after deportation to Poland in order to commit burglaries. The defendant advanced that he was in custody in Poland throughout the indictment period, which was disproved by cross border information sharing, international information requests and identification evidence. The defendant was unanimously convicted after trial.
R v AMA – Harrow Crown Court Oct 2017 (Defence Counsel)
Defence Counsel in a case concerning burglary & theft. The defendant was a carpenter working on the complainant’s property. £10,000 in cash went missing from the complainant’s home during the defendant’s period of work. There was a successful submission of no case to answer on the burglary and the jury unanimously acquitted the defendant after trial on the alternative of theft.
R v CJ – Woolwich Crown Court Sept 2017 (Defence Counsel)
Defence counsel in a case concerning breach of a restraining order and criminal damage. The defendant was said to have attended his ex partner’s address in violation of a restraining order. Whilst there, he was alleged to have kicked and damaged the front door. The defence was one of mistaken recognition and the defendant was unanimously acquitted after trial.