Website Data Policy

Read Our Latest Website Data Policy

CONNECT WITH US FOR THE LATEST NEWS & UPDATES

Felicity was instructed by the Australian Centre for International Justice and led Daye Gang of the Victorian Bar You can read the JFM press release here justiceformyanmar.org/press-r…

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

The memo set out international law and guidance places due diligence obligations on the Singapore Exchange and possible liability on the Monetary Authority of Singapore and the Singapore Government for companies doing business with the Myanmar military.

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

Justice for Myanmar issued a press release today on the latest moves in the Golden City investment scheme linked to the Myanmar military and the ETC divestment.

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

Dr Felicity Gerry's Legal investment memo has $80million SG impact on Golden City scheme in Myanmar The legal investment memo by Dr Felicity Gerry KC has led to ETC divestment. Read more in the thread. pic.twitter.com/AuLZex7GMm

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

Dr Felicity Gerry KC has assisted in drafting and supported a petition for a conditional pardon for 2 IPP prisoners. The petition was served on the Minister of Justice Alex Chalk MP by Dean Kingham of Rees Thomas Watson solicitors. Read more here... libertaschambers.com/media-hu… pic.twitter.com/SSACttsdTu

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

On Friday 7 July, Dr Felicity Gerry KC mitigated on behalf of Jarrad Spence Robinson at a sentencing hearing which led to a life sentence with a minimum term of 32 years for murder by stabbing and ENCRO Chat drug dealing. You can read more here mylondon.news/news/north-lon… pic.twitter.com/lTswG3Bmh9

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

Watch the playback via our YouTube Channel, or by the below link: libertaschambers.com/media-hu… #CriminalDefence #Webinar #Barristers #Law

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

In our latest webinar, Dr Felicity Gerry KC and Marie Spenwyn discuss the delivery of defence openings / summary of issues, how defence statements can be framed to support a defence opening, and what is the bare minimum for opening defence issues which is fair.

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

Rule 25.9, taken together with the overriding objective allows for a fair and concise rehearsal of the issues raised in the defence statement or alternatively for the jury to be given the defence statement.

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

𝗗𝗶𝗱 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗶𝘀𝘀 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝘄𝗲𝗯𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗿? A practice is growing of asking Defence Counsel to open 1 or 2 sentences after the prosecution opening in serious cases which may not be in accordance with the Criminal Procedure Rules. 🧵 libertaschambers.com/media-hu…

About 5 months ago from LibertasChambers's Twitter via Publer.io

Latest News

Half-time Acquittal in serious assault Syam’s client was said to have been the driver of a vehicle involved in a dangerous police pursuit in residential areas, during which significant damage was caused. One of the pursuing officers had attempted to remove the keys from the ignition, whereupon the defendant was said to have made off, thereby dragging the officer with the vehicle. Giving evidence, the officer described how he had feared the imminent risk of death. Through rigorous cross-examination, Syam demonstrated the weakness of the identification evidence, and surrounding investigative failures, by the police. The prosecution therefore offered no evidence against Syam’s client at ‘half time’, whose good character was preserved. Syam was instructed and assisted by Sara Khan of Central Chambers Law Solicitors

Libertas Chambers

Fatima Laher in Bladed Article Case Fatima Laher recently represented a defendant charged with 1 count of possessing a bladed article, contrary to s.139 Criminal Justice Act 1988. Fatima Laher, made a successful submission of no case to answer, whereby the charge was dismissed and the defendant was acquitted. The defendant was stopped and searched by police and found in possession of a lock knife, an offence for which the defendant could have received up to 4 years imprisonment. A further aggravating feature in the case was that the defendant had been recently convicted of a similar type of offence. There were two issues in this case. Firstly, whether a lock knife is categorised as a ‘bladed article’ which the act states is ‘any article which has a blade or is sharply pointed, except a folding pocket knife’, s.139 (2) or under s.139 (3) a ‘folding pocket knife, if the cutting edge of its blade exceeds 3 inches.’ A folding pocketknife does not fall to be liable within the legislation. Following rigorous cross-examination of the OIC, it could not be said with confidence that the blade did exceed 3 inches. The officer provided a very limited description, the photographs were unreliable and no physical exhibit was provided during the trial to demonstrate that (a) the blade exceeded 3 inches, (b) a folding mechanism existed, or (c) that it was capable of being locked in position. Therefore, it was not a prohibition in which s.139 applies. During the submission, the court was referred to the Court of Appeal judgment in R v Deegan (1998) 2 Cr.App.R.121 CA where it was ruled that a ‘lock knife’ does not fall within the category of a ‘folding pocket knife’ because it is not immediately foldable at all times. Fatima further relied on the authorities of Sharma v DPP [2018] EWHC 3330 which sets out the definition of a folding knife and Godwin v DPP [1993] 96 Cr App R 244, to demonstrate that the defendant had a good reason for possessing the knife. Fatima was instructed by Chris Finnegan, Drummonds Solicitors.

Libertas Chambers

Fatima Laher represents defendant accused of perverting the course of justice Fatima Laher represented a defendant who was accused of and pleaded guilty to committing acts tending to pervert the course of justice. Although the crown placed the offence at its highest, following extensive mitigation, Fatima persuaded the court to impose a suspended period of imprisonment with rehabilitation activity requirement days and an unpaid work requirement. This was despite the CoA ruling in R v Abdulwahab (2018) where ‘a case of perverting the course of justice almost invariably calls for a custodial sentence. Suspended sentences are, in this context, very unusual.’ Fatima was instructed by Sadia Ali, The Johnson Partnership.

Libertas Chambers

Latest Insights

Sending Christine Keeler to prison was a National disgrace By Dr Felicity Gerry KC I am delighted to see our campaign for the posthumous exoneration of Christine Keeler being covered for 4 days in The Mirror. The campaign is being brought by her son Seymour Platt who was left the task of telling her real story in her will. At the height of the “Profumo Scandal” Christine was the victim of a violent assault by a man called Lucky Gordon. He was prosecuted but sacked his lawyers and represented himself. In cross examination of her, he admitted assaulting her. She told the police she had not mentioned two other witnesses because they asked her not to. On the suggestion that she had lied about about who was present, Gordon’s conviction was quashed by the Court of Appeal (the court unusually expressing their belief that Christine was telling the truth). Nonetheless she was prosecuted for perjury and PCJ. She pleaded guilty and was sent to prison. She was under terrible pressure. For example, news reports account members of the public throwing eggs at her outside the Old Bailey in Stephen Ward’s trial where she was also wrongly accused of being a sex worker. Ward took his life before verdicts on whether it could be shown he was not living on her “immoral” earnings. These events framed Christine Keeler appallingly for the rest of her life, as Seymour Platt has explained in the Mirror. The law on the charges Christine faced (despite being a victim) only applies if there is a “material lie”. That Christine did not state that two other men were present when she was violently assaulted was totally irrelevant, especially as a proper investigation would have revealed they saw the attack and because her attacker admitted in court he assaulted her The Criminal Cases Review Commission is now quite properly investigating the case. The implications of the comments her silk Jeremy Hutchinson QC made at the time made it obvious she pleaded guilty when she was not, and she was shamed, unlike others whose reputation has been restored. There is a real risk that she was wrongly convicted. Sending her to prison was dreadful and she rightly deserves a posthumous exoneration. It would also go a long way to reframing a case that is the epitome of slut shaming, fitting with modern CPS guidance on violence against women and girls

Libertas Chambers

Chambers Article: Rule 25.9(2)(c): Defence Statements and ‘openings’ Traditionally in England and Wales the defence may give an opening address at the start of the defence case, but only where evidence is to be called other than from the accused person. In many cases this means that the issues are not identified clearly until a late stage and in long cases there can be an advantage to the prosecution to dominate the trial issues. In a recent webinar we discussed this topic of delivery of defence openings / summary of issues and how defence statements can be framed to support a defence opening. This article is a summary of the key provisions discussed. Click below to read in full. Download Article now To stay up to date with insight articles, webinars and chamber news why not subscribe to Libertas Lens (our periodic newsletter) – Click here to register