Skip to content
Follow us on Twitter Follow us on Google+

Janick Fielding

Year of call: 1997

VAT No: 798745058 | BSB Registration Click Here

Email: Send Email | Download full CV

Specialist CV

Serious Crime (Download)

Civil & Criminal Fraud (Download)

Regulatory, Judicial Review,Tribunal and Police Actions (Download)

Private Road Traffic (Download),

Mediation & ADR (Download)

Qualifications and Professional Associations BA Anthropology & Law (LSE) Called to the Bar by the Inner Temple 1997 Member of the Criminal Bar Association

Areas of Specialisation

An experienced trial advocate, Janick is most often called upon to fight difficult cases in which the odds are stacked against the client. Well known for his fearless cross-examination and excellent closing speeches, Janick has for over fifteen years been a first choice for solicitors who have attracted challenging cases, difficult situations and defendants who adamantly refuse to plead in the face of overwhelming evidence. Many of his finest results have come from those cases where the client has already sacked previous counsel after unwanted pressure to plead guilty has been applied.

Janick’s tactical skills are increasingly called upon early in a case, sometimes even before a client is charged. His attention to detail and desire to prepare thoroughly to meet and address potential difficulties are well recognised by solicitors who pride themselves on providing a top class service.

No matter how narrow the defence, regardless of how implausible it may seem on the facts, if the client insists on running it then Janick will be only too pleased to fight it.

Janick’s willingness to work closely with his solicitors is often relied upon in managing cases where the client is particularly nervous or vulnerable, or where they have much to lose because of the devastating effect the proceedings they face will have upon their lives.  In such circumstances, Janick can be relied upon to overcome those difficulties and achieve the best results.

The majority of his cases involve the importation and supply of drugs, armed robbery and serious physical or sexual violence. His experience however is far more wide ranging and covers almost all of the criminal spectrum including environmental offences and health and safety.

Janick is also experienced in contesting matters before the Court of Appeal and the Administrative Court, having taken numerous points on conviction and sentence.

Janick’s practice is increasingly dominated by private instructions, thus allowing him to devote the time and care that each case truly warrants. He will accept a limited number of legal aid briefs, though only very serious or high profile cases.

  • Case Profile

    R v Jordan Turner-Hall [2015-16] – Wounding [Privately funded]

    Counsel defended Jordan Turner-Hall, the former England and Harlequins rugby player in relation to his involvement in an altercation at the Prism nightclub in Brighton. Following the untimely death of a friend, the defendant and other old school friends had gathered in Brighton to remember him, the evening ending with a visit to the aforementioned club. The night had passed peacefully until two very drunk local men decided to single out one of the defendant’s group. An altercation developed and various people, the defendant included, tried to act as peacemakers. Then, without provocation, one of the men punched the defendant in the face before fleeing into a dark corridor. The defendant followed, as did others. Although the club’s bars were covered by CCTV, the corridor was not. All that could be seen of the altercation that then occurred was one of the drunk men flying horizontally back into shot, having just sustained multiple facial fractures.

    The Crown’s case was that the defendant was an aggressor and responsible for the injuries that must have been sustained by the complainants in the corridor. The defence asserted variously that in fact the defendant had been assaulted by them, he had done do more than push one of them after he had risen from the floor having been knocked down from behind in the dark, that the injuries must have been caused variously by their own drunken misadventures or by others from his group who had come to protect him and that the police had wilfully misinterpreted evidence available to them, ignored evidence that supported him and had targeted him deliberately when they ought to have investigated fairly and impartially.

    The case involved very close analysis and interpretation of CCTV footage and thorough review of the police investigation. The defence were not assisted either by an unnecessary cut-throat run by the co-defendant. Extensive cross-examination of the complainants revealed their multiple lies and advanced also the motive for the complaint, namely one of them, realising from social media that an England rugby international had been involved, had targeted him with his complaints in the hope of compensation that would enable him to fund the rebuilding of his nose. The defence also illuminated significant failures by the police to investigate the matter fairly and in accordance with their duties. The defendant was acquitted. – Hove Crown Court.

    R v MX [2013‐15] ‐ double rape.

    The defendant, a school caretaker and father of four, was accused of historic, anal rapes of his daughter, now in her twenties. The allegations cost the defendant his job and resulted in many friends and family refusing to speak with him. His picture and details of the allegations were printed in the local press. He and his family also became victims of abuse and vandalism arising from the considerable ill‐feeling within the local community. The defence case was that the complainant had fabricated her allegations in order to secure a council flat, something she would never otherwise have been entitled to as she had her own bedroom in the council house occupied by her parents and other siblings. During cross‐examination, counsel established a number of crucial facts; that the complainant had an unhealthy fascination with the series ‘CSI Special Victim’ from which it was said that her fabrications arose, she had first made a decision to ‘discuss’ the allegations after a friend read her tarot cards and told her that something bad had happened to her; that she had tried to discuss the allegations with her deceased grandfather through a spirit medium at a special church after payment of a fee; that she liked reading reality magazines featuring ‘real life’ stories about rape and familial abuse. Further, although in her police interview she had pretended not to know what sex was, and had asserted that because of her dyslexia she was unable to read books, she had to concede that she had in fact read repeatedly the entire ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ series. An irrational dislike of her parents and jealousy of her siblings was also established.   The first jury were hung, the second jury acquitted. ‐ Basildon Crown Court

    R v Ashby (& ors) [2014-15] – attempted murder and s.18 GBH. [Privately funded]

    The defendant was one of three charged with an attempted murder arising from a week-long dispute between the defendant and the complainant that had turned to violence at the Brixton Splash music festival. The defendant and the complainant had fallen out over insulting comments made about the defendant’s ex-girlfriend. At the festival the complainant had harassed the defendant to fight with him. It then transpired that the complainant was armed with a gas spray. The defendant called for back-up. The co-defendants arrived and at first tried to placate the two protagonists.  They all went to a nearby side street to talk, however, the complainant pulled out his spray and used it on the defendant and one of the co-defendants. A chase ensued, resulting in the complainant being dragged to the floor in front of a crowd of people, where he was kicked and stamped until unconscious. As a result of brain injuries, he was in a coma for some time. The defence case was that although the defendant had been involved in the chase, it was his co-defendants who had committed the crime. He had not participated, only watched.

    The case featured a significant amount of poor quality CCTV and cell site analysis, as well as cut-throat defences. The defendant was the only one acquitted. – Inner London Crown Court.

    For a full list of janicks cases click here