Barrister Bismillah

Our client pleaded guilty to a violent offences against a lone and vulnerable female. The offence was pre-planned and unprovoked and resulted in the victim sustaining multiple bruising to her face along with a fractured eye. Barrister Bismillah succeeding in persuading the Crown Court Judge to suspend the term of imprisonment. Our client was further Ordered to pay the victim £1,000 compensation to reflect the serious and long-term impact the assault had on the victim.

SC was charged with a number of sexual and dishonesty offences against the same complainant. The complainant, a very vulnerable adult, had alleged anal and vaginal rape. She further alleged that after the sexual impropriety had concluded, SC had appropriated property from her.

SC was interviewed by the Police and tendered a prepared statement denying the offences. SCs legal team drafted an 8-page defence statement. The Crown Prosecution Service responded to the defence statement with over 900 pages of evidence. The 900 pages consisted of police reports in which the complainant had alleged rape against others. A critical analysis of the evidence revealed that the complainant, in every instance, accused the perpetrator of using very specific disparaging words before and after the alleged rapes. These instances were so similar that they could not simply be dismissed as a coincidence. An application was made to the Court for the previous allegations of rape, all of which were taken no further by the Police, to be placed before a Jury. To supplement the application, representations were made to the Crown Prosecution Service requesting a case review in light of the new evidence and on the basis that the complainant was incredulous.

The case was escalated to the sexual offences lead (manager) at the Crown Prosecution Service. As a result, the case was dropped the day before trial.

The defendant (VZG) had never been arrested before.

He lived in a HMO and a fellow resident (the complainant) alleged that during a massage VIG kissed her on the neck and whispered sexual profanities in her ear.

VIG was arrested and interviewed by the Police and he denied the offence. He was charged with sexual assault and pleaded not guilty. At trial, the complainant was cross-examined and it became apparent that she had exaggerated key parts of her evidence.

The trial lasted 4 days at Harrow Crown Court. The Jury retired for a brief period and returned a unanimous verdict of not guilty.

To save yourself a lot of aggro make sure you instruct the best lawyers from the onset of your case. If the defendant was found guilty, he would have been placed on the "sex offenders register"; he would have had to sign on at the local Police Station, provide his financial details to Police and a number of other onerous and intrusive requirements. Additionally, he would have landed himself a criminal record and been barred from certain types of employment.

The defendant (GC) was charged with disclosing private sexual photographs, breaching a Restraining Order and stalking the complainant.

Between December 2021 and January 2022 GC was alleged to have engaged in conduct that amounted to stalking and in doing so he was in breach of a Restraining Order.

 Furthermore, it was alleged that GC disclosed, to others, private sexual photos of the complainant.

GC pleaded not guilty to all the charges and bail was secured by his legal team. The case was listed for a trial to take place at Harrow Crown Court in June 2023.

A detailed defence statement was submitted together with requests for further evidence. As a result, two-weeks before the trial was due to commence, the CPS dropped all the charges against GC and offered no evidence.

Client was charged with multiple counts of violence the most serious of which was attempted murder. After a 13-day trial, conducted solely by Barrister Bismillah, the client was found not guilty.

The client had no criminal record. It was alleged that she misappropriated a laptop that was delivered to her neighbour. An image of the parcel was taken by the courier and exhibited in evidence. The client was seen on CCTV taking what appeared to be the parcel from her neighbours pigeon hole. An application to dismiss was made on the clients behalf and accordingly, the Crown decided to discontinue the case.

It was alleged that the client had punched an officer and spat at another. Following her arrest, she was taken to the Police Station where she urinated in her cell. This landed her with a further charge of criminal damage. The offences were all clearly captured on video. Following a 3-day trial at the Royal Courts of Justice (extension of Inner London CC) our client was found not guilty of all the charges.

As part of a Police operation, the client was intercepted and found in possession of 10KG of cocaine and charged with the offences of possession with intent to supply. The drugs were uncut, in blocks, of 97% purity and had a street value of between £800,000 – £1,100,000. According to the sentencing guidelines the starting point for 5KG of cocaine is 7 years immediate imprisonment. Our client has double the amount. Following a lengthy sentencing hearing with strong submissions my Barrister Bismillah our client was sentenced to 5-years imprisonment.

Officers entered the client’s property looking for another. An altercation took place between our client and the officers which resulted in a charge. Representations were made to the CPS for a case review and for the case to be discontinued. Following a brief period of consideration, the CPS decided to offer no evidence.

On the weekend of the Her Late Majesty Queen Elizabeth II Platinum Jubilee, our client was seen by members of the public carrying a sword-stick. He was arrested and unpresented in his Police Interview. Written representations were made to the Crown Prosecution Service requesting a case review. Our representations were initially rejected. Following a telephone conference between Barrister Bismillah and the reviewing lawyer at the Crown Prosecution Service, the case was reconsidered and discontinued.

Our client was charged with breaching a non-molestation Order. He had a recent previous conviction for the same offence. Our client was found at his home address with his ex-partner. Contact with the ex-partner was prohibited by the Court Order. Our client pleaded not guilty and the case was adjourned for a trial. A detailed defence statement was served on the CPS. Secondary dislcosure was used to make written representations. Within 48-hours of making these representations the CPS discontinued the case.

Our client was charged with one count of driving whilst under the influence of drugs (cocaine). The blood sample was sent off by the Police for analysis and came back with a reading of 109. The prosecution expert was cross-examined by Barrister Bismillah about the way in which the blood analysis had taken place. Mathematical, methodological and statistical flaws in the analytical process were put to the expert. After a brief period of deliberation, the Lay Bench found our client not guilty of the charge.

Our client was stopped by Police whilst riding his moped. The moped was searched and officers uncovered a large amount of cannabis. A subsequent search was conducted of his home address and more drugs, a large sum of cash and other paraphernalia was found in his bedroom. There was extensive telephone evidence suggestive of selling directly to users. Following extensive mitigation by Barrister Bismillah the Crown Court Judge was persuaded to deviate from the sentencing guidelines and instead of imposing a term of imprisonment he imposed a 12-month Community Order.

The case involved a client who had attempted to smuggle drugs into Creamfields. The Crowns case was that the defednant, once inside the festival, intended to supply these drugs on a commercial scale for significant financial gain. Our client pleaded guilty on the basis that the drugs were for social supply and that he did not intend to make a profit; he was merely handing the drugs back to his friends. In seeking to prove its case, the Crown relied on an extensive SMS chat between our client and others. The Crowns case further relied on a Drug Expert who, after interpreting the SMS messages, concluded that the defendant intended to sell the drugs on a commercial scale. At a Newton Hearing, the expert was cross-examined by Barrister Bismillah and as a result the Drug Expert recanted from the conclusions he had made in his initial statement. Consequently, the Judge found that the drugs were for social supply. This factor has a significant bearing on the sentence that was passed on our client.

Our client pleaded guilty to a violent offences against a lone and vulnerable female. The offence was pre-planned and unprovoked and resulted in the victim sustaining multiple bruising to her face along with a fractured eye. Barrister Bismillah succeeding in persuading the Crown Court Judge to suspend the term of imprisonment. Our client was further Ordered to pay the victim £1,000 compensation to reflect the serious and long-term impact the assault had on the victim.

SC was charged with a number of sexual and dishonesty offences against the same complainant. The complainant, a very vulnerable adult, had alleged anal and vaginal rape. She further alleged that after the sexual impropriety had concluded, SC had appropriated property from her.

SC was interviewed by the Police and tendered a prepared statement denying the offences. SCs legal team drafted an 8-page defence statement. The Crown Prosecution Service responded to the defence statement with over 900 pages of evidence. The 900 pages consisted of police reports in which the complainant had alleged rape against others. A critical analysis of the evidence revealed that the complainant, in every instance, accused the perpetrator of using very specific disparaging words before and after the alleged rapes. These instances were so similar that they could not simply be dismissed as a coincidence. An application was made to the Court for the previous allegations of rape, all of which were taken no further by the Police, to be placed before a Jury. To supplement the application, representations were made to the Crown Prosecution Service requesting a case review in light of the new evidence and on the basis that the complainant was incredulous.

The case was escalated to the sexual offences lead (manager) at the Crown Prosecution Service. As a result, the case was dropped the day before trial.