R-NH- Birmingham Crown Court- Possession of Firearms and Ammunition.
Police executed a search warrant at NH’s flat, where they recovered a shopping bag hidden in a cupboard which contained, 2 firearms, SIM card [belonging to NH] and bullet and shot gun cartridges. The fingerprints of NH were also recovered from the shopping bag. The case proceeded to trial and NH was found Not Guilty.
R-v- Southwark Crown Court – Possession of Imitation Firearm.
Client was captured on CCTV by neighbours pointing a shotgun at a group of youths on the street, when the police arrived, client stated it was a metal bar which could have mistaken to be a shotgun. No evidence offered on the day of trial.
R-v- RT- Birmingham Crown Court- Possession of Firearm
RT was arrested in the front passenger seat of a vehicle, found near to his feet was a man bag which contained a firearm. He plead not guilty and was acquitted after trial.
R-v-JT – Birmingham Crown Court – Possession of Firearm
Officers received intelligence that firearms were stored in a storage unit. When they arrived they saw JT in a vehicle outside the unit, he was stopped and searched and a key was recovered from his pocket. The unit was searched and a MAC 10 submachine gun and shotguns were recovered. JT’s DNA was found on the pad lock to the unit. We represented JT at the police station and at Court. We served a defence statement and at the trial the prosecution offered no evidence.
R-NS- Birmingham Crown Court- Conspiracy to Possess Firearms with intent to cause fear of violence.
The defendant was charged with others for a Conspiracy to Possess a Firearm with Intent to Cause Fear of Violence. ‘Operation Granite’ was a complex investigation which focused on serious criminality including conspiracies to use firearms in public. The prosecution case is that, against the backdrop of a commercial dispute, the defendants engaged in and directed a campaign of violence against the directors/employees of McLaren Construction Ltd.
The investigation started in 2015 and concluded in 2019 when the defendants were charged.
The evidence against the defendant was circumstantial. The prosecution case relied on the attribution of mobile telephone numbers. We represented the client from the outset, when he was advised to give a no comment interview during his police interview. He was also advised not to give evidence during his trial. He disputed the phone attribution of the phone linking his phone to the incidents. The defendant was acquitted after trial.