Siobhan Grey QC
‘A passionate, smooth advocate with great communication skills.’ – Chambers and Partners, 2021.
Experienced in the following areas:
- Murder and Manslaughter
- Sexual Offences
- Organised Crime
Siobhan Grey QC specialises in murder cases and serious crime and has extensive experience in dealing with expert witnesses such as Pathologists and Psychiatrists in Murder cases. She leaves no stone unturned and gets to the heart of the issues.
Siobhan specialises in Homicide cases which regularly involves expert witnesses in the areas of pathology, psychiatry, blood spatter, toxicology and DNA evidence as well as telephone data, cell site and CCTV analysis.
Her murder cases are conducted both nationally as well as internationally. She has argued cases before the European Court of Human Rights in relation to the admissibility of hearsay evidence under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 in a gang-land murder case and is currently engaged in appellate work in St Kitts and the Turks and Caicos Islands in relation to homicide cases.
R v Pachecka: Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey (November 2021) An 8 week re-trial for Murder after the conviction was overturned in the Court of Appeal. The defendant was unanimously found Not Guilty of Murder and Manslaughter. The case involved complex medical evidence regarding PATHOLOGY with multiple experts to examine. Four pathologists gave evidence as well as multiple scientific forensic experts which undermined the whole JOINT ENTERPRISE argument advanced by the prosecution. The case has been the subject of an international documentary made by investigative journalists based in Poland.
R v Thompson: Newport CC (March 2021) A 10 week trial. The Defendant, along with others, was charged with the murder of a 17 year old boy. The case concerned a drugs turf war. The case involved an extensive chase where the deceased was cornered and stabbed to death. The case concerned important principles about withdrawing from a JOINT ENTERPRISE. The Defendant was found Not Guilty of Murder and convicted of Manslaughter.
R v Pachecka and Others Court of Appeal (December 2020) Siobhan Grey QC led the legal arguments in the Court of Appeal, Criminal Division which resulted in a conviction for murder being quashed and a retrial ordered. The appeal involved investigative journalists.
R v Lall. Inner London Crown Court. (November 2020) The Defendant was charged with murder, a plea to Manslaughter was offered by the Defence but rejected by the Crown before trial. The Defendant was acquitted of Murder and convicted of Manslaughter on the grounds of Diminished Responsibility. The case involved complex PSYCHIATRIC evidence concerning paranoid schizophrenia, non-compliance with medication and impairment of self-control in the context of mental illness. The Defendant was given a Hospital Order. The Prosecution sought to appeal the Hospital Order by way of an Attorney General’s Reference on the grounds that the sentence was too lenient. The Defence was successful in resisting the AG’s Reference and the Hospital Order was upheld.
R v H: Cardiff Crown Court. (June 2019). A 6 week trial. Represented a boy aged 17 who suffered with a severe stammer and had been diagnosed with ADHD and a Depressive Disorder. He was charged with murder and the trial involved five co-accused in relation to the torture and stabbing of a young man. The defendant was found not guilty of murder.
R v P: Central Criminal Court, Old Bailey. (November 2018). Represented a man charged with the murder of his employer at her home address. The issues focused on the nature of the Defendant’s medication and its impact on his brain. This case involved extensive investigations into pharmacology and heptology. The defendant pleaded guilty.
R v O: Swansea Crown Court. (October 2018). Represented a woman charged with murdering a pensioner in his own home. The case involved three Defendants and focused on the unreliability of non- statistical DNA evidence. The defendant was found not guilty of murder and manslaughter.
R v H: Inner London Crown Court. (May 2018). The Defendant was charged with Manslaughter having sold slimming tablets over the internet resulting in death of a vulnerable young woman. The defence made a submission at the close of the prosecution case which was successful.
R v F: Sheffield Crown Court. (October 2017) A 4 week trial. Represented a man charged with the torture and murder of a drug user. The case involved three Defendants and focused on the unreliability of mobile phone and social media evidence in a case where the Defendant was running alibi. The defendant was found not guilty of murder and his two co-defendants were convicted.
R v Goodall: Sheffield Crown Court (October 2016) Represented a man charged with murder. The case concerned causation issues requiring the cross-examination of numerous expert witnesses in the areas of pathology; orthopaedic medicine; cardiology and heptology. The defendant was found not guilty of murder and convicted of manslaughter.
R v Seton: European Court of Human Rights (October 2015) Gang land shooting. The issue turned on the admissibility of Hearsay evidence in a murder trial. The case is reported in Criminal Law Review Commentary 2016.
Siobhan has a long history of defending in serious sexual offences involving historic sexual abuse; violent sexual assaults committed during the course of a homicide as well as internet sexual offending which engages multi-jurisdictional issues. Siobhan has completed the vulnerable witness training courses and is experienced at cross examining young and vulnerable witnesses. Furthermore, she understands the importance of disclosure issues in particular third-party disclosure in such cases and is always live to the question of s.41 of the Youth and Criminal Evidence Act 1999 as regards the admissibility of a complainant’s prior sexual history.
R v N: Maidstone Crown Court (March 2022) The case involved historic allegations of rape and sexual assault. The case involved incisive cross examination of the complainant with detailed disclosure of third-party material from outside the jurisdiction. The Defendant was found Not Guilty of all offences.
R v W: Portsmouth Crown Court (January 2022) The case involved historic allegations of sexual assault and the Crown asserted that one allegation was caught on the camera of a mobile phone. The Defendant was found Not Guilty of all offences.
R v B: Winchester Crown Court (August 2021) The case involved multiple historic sexual offences. The case involved detailed cross examination of the complainant. The Defendant was found Not Guilty of all offences.
R v S: Lewes Crown Court (July 2019) Represented a priest charged with multiple historic sexual offences. The case involved legal issues such as severance; third party disclosure and ultimately psychiatric evidence concerning fitness to plead and stand trial. The crown offered no evidence.
R v W: Croydon Crown Court. (May 2019) Represented a man charged with 18 counts of sexual assault alleged to have been committed over skype. Extensive legal argument on the admissibility of hearsay evidence found on the Defendant’s telephone and computer was ruled inadmissible and which had formed the core of the Crown’s case. The defendant pleaded guilty to lesser counts.
R v G: Guildford Crown Court (August 2018) Represented a man on multiple historic allegations of child cruelty dating back to the 1980s and 1990s. The case involved extensive disclosure issues as regards third party material in relation to all complainants. The defendant was found not guilty of all counts.
R v HB: Guildford Crown Court (February 2018) Represented a man charged with stalking who applied a tracker to his ex-wife’s car. The issue turned on the construction of the words in the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. The defence application to dismiss the charges was successful.
R v P. Croydon Magistrates’ Court. (October 2017) Represented a man charged with rape and sexual assault. The case focused on seeking and obtaining disclosure of the complainant’s telephone which highlighted the extensive messages sent to the Defendant by the complainant which resulted in the prosecution offering no evidence.
R v R: Oxford Crown Court (September 2016) Represented a deaf man with learning difficulties charged with rape. The case involved numerous intermediaries during the trial process and a careful understanding of how to present the Defendant’s evidence in chief before the jury in line with the Advocates’ tool kit for vulnerable witnesses. The defendant was found not guilty of the rape allegation.
Siobhan has a long history of defending in fraud related offences including investment frauds, and MTIC frauds. She has defended in SFO prosecutions including a pension fraud worth over £50 million which was the biggest pension fraud since the Maxwell trial in the 1990s; a conspiracy to defraud involving £80 million whereby detector devices, ‘the Alpha 6’ were sold to Government and law enforcement agencies world-wide to detect explosives, drugs and weapons. She has defended company directors prosecuted under the Export Control Act 2002 for the alleged violation of UK export control regulations in relation to conventional arms and ammunition as well as dual use goods to Southeast Asia. Siobhan has spoken at National events on Export Control and Dual Use items, which included the former head of the Secretariat for the Wassenaar Arrangement on export control of arms and ammunition.
R v P: Cardiff Crown Court. Acted for an Accountant charged with Defrauding the European Union and the Welsh Government of £5.19m in grants. The defendant pleaded guilty to lesser offences.
R v M: Southampton Crown Court. Acted for an Accountant on an indictment involving eight defendants charged with Conspiracy to Defraud by using the Construction Industry Scheme to defraud HMRC of over £1million of tax owed by subcontractors in demolition projects. The defendant was acquitted.
R v P: Central Criminal Court: Represented a company director on 22 counts of Fraud and exporting dual purpose goods (commercial and military items) to China without a licence. The case involved novel and complex legal argument concerning the EC Regulation.
428/2009 in relation to Export Control and whether it lacked legal certainty in the context of the classification of Microwave Monolithic Integrated Circuits. Three expert witnesses in the fields of electrical engineering and export control were engaged in the case. After extensive legal argument, the defendant pleaded to a lesser indictment and was given a suspended sentence.
R v A: Bolton Crown Court: Defended one of two defendants charged on an indictment with 27 counts of Fraud and Money Laundering involving millions of pounds regarding property in the Cayman Islands. The defendant was acquitted of all charges.
R v S: Manchester Crown Court. Defended the wife of the principal defendant in a £200 million money laundering regarding a licensed money service business specialising in remitting money to Pakistan. The crown did not proceed against the defendant.
- South Eastern Circuit
- Criminal Bar Association
- The Kalisher Trust
- Inside Justice Miscarriage of Justice organisation
Presented a zoom seminar on Diminished Responsibility in Homicide cases. May 2020.
Presented a seminar on Expert witnesses in Homicide cases – a look at Pathology, DNA,
Blood Spatter and Neuro-Psychiatry. July 2019
Presented a seminar on Disclosure in the Criminal Courts, Gray’s Inn, Oct. 2017
Presented a seminar on the Export Control Act 2002 and the export of Dual Use Goods, July 2017
Chaired a seminar on Freedom of Expression and the Internet and criminal offences Florence University, July 2013
Devised and presented a Symposium at the European Parliament’s Grand Chamber on the
Impact of the Internet and Social Media Platforms. Brussels, June 2012