Janick Fielding

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.                   

RECOMMENDATIONS / QUOTATIONS:

“If a case requires a tough approach, Janick will deliver without question.”

“Janick is fearless in dealing with judges and witnesses.”

PROFILE:

Janick is an experienced criminal defence practitioner, with a very well established practice in London and the South East.

As a first choice counsel for a number of discerning solicitors, it is of no surprise that one eminent partner wrote;

 “I instruct Janick to rip the heart out of the prosecution case.” – Jeremy Yuille (Albin & Co)          

In all circumstances requiring quality defence counsel, Janick is invariably approachable, client-friendly and keen to do his best, often working beyond expectations and through unsociable hours when the case requires it.      

His ability to think around problems, provide fresh perspective and realistic advice adds much needed breadth to any committed legal team.                                                                         

NOTABLE CASES:

R v Hollywell [2022] assault by penetration, sexual assault

The defendant, a man with drug addictions and longstanding mental health difficulties, was alleged to have targeted a vulnerable and distressed student who had sat at the roadside on her way home from a nightclub in the early hours of the morning. The Complainant described how she had been frozen in fear and unable to stop the defendant’s advances, until a passer-by presented her with the opportunity to raise the alarm.

The defendant asserted that she was lying, and that all he had done was speak to her because he had seen she looked upset. He was unable to explain to the police why she should make up such heinous allegations against him, a man she had never before met.

Meticulous cross-examination revealed that the Complainant, contrary to her evidence, was extremely drunk at the time of the incident, that she had gone to a club where she had fallen out with her boyfriend, who had then gone home without her. Angry with him, she went to his house to confront him. He ended the relationship, she begged him not to do that. She left and returned to his house again, pleading with him to take her back, and again he refused. On the third return she knocked on the door and ran away, according to the boyfriend something she had a history of doing. She denied in cross-examination that when she had been sat at the roadside she was in fact hiding from her boyfriend, but the weight of the evidence was very much against her. Her boyfriend had in fact walked into the street and called her name, but she had ignored him. The evidence demonstrated she had shown a clear determination to get the attention of her boyfriend and had consistently failed. Just minutes later, she made allegations of rape to the passer-by who had seen her with the defendant, allegations she latter commuted to assault by penetration, and her boyfriend was then called to be with her.

The defendant was extremely challenging to represent, on account of his difficulties and the behavioural manifestations of the same. Counsel had to work very carefully to keep his attention and enable his participation. Counsel was grateful to the accommodating nature of the Learned Judge, whose empathy and appreciation of the practical difficulties being grappled with by the defence allowed sufficient latitude to enable the defendant to give evidence, a crucial factor in the case. Nonetheless, his presentation was at times disruptive and very difficult to manage, and at other times he was absent from the dock because he refused to attend. He was also presented to the jury, when giving evidence, surrounded by security officers, which just looked bad, but was unavoidable. In his speech, counsel had to weigh the evidence with great care, limiting the damage done by the poor presentation of the defendant and highlighting the relevance of significant inroads made into the prosecution evidence, especially the credibility of the Complainant. The defendant was acquitted on all counts. – Oxford Crown Court.

R v Vigar [2021-22] arson with intent to endanger life, arson reckless as to whether life was endangered

The defendant, a young man with longstanding and serious mental health difficulties, had determined that the world was going to end, but that before it did, he believed, having been so instructed by higher powers, that he needed to send a message to his uncle and their family, by fire-bombing their house. Accordingly, in the middle of the night, he made two Molotov cocktails, smashed the glass near the front door of the property and threw the lit incendiaries inside. Swift action from the householders prevented the fire from taking hold and no one was injured. The defendant’s actions were caught on CCTV. Following his arrest, he explained, in his delusional state, the nature and the importance of what he had done. He was returned to a secure mental health hospital and further assessed.

Counsel advised at length on detailed and specific expert reports and thereafter discussed the issues in conference with an eminent clinical psychiatrist. Counsel then argued successfully that there could not be established an intent to endanger life, or indeed that the defendant had been reckless in his actions as there could not be established a realisation of risk. The Crown were therefore left with no option but to accept simple arson as a lesser alternative. – Bournemouth Crown Court.

R v WX [2021-22] GBH

On 14th April 2022, at the Crown Court in Bournemouth, counsel, who had originally been instructed to deal with the matter as an inevitable guilty plea and sentence, secured the acquittal of a long-time victim of extreme physical and sexual abuse who was facing an allegation of inflicting grievous bodily harm with intent.

Having allowed her boyfriend to invite his friend, a fellow doorman and former cage-fighter, over for drinks one evening, the defendant had been awoken from a drunken sleep at around 05:00, by her 17 year old, mentally-vulnerable daughter, pleading for her mother to tell the friend to leave after she had been subjected to an indecent assault and repeated unwanted encouragement to sleep with him. A short while later, the friend claimed to have awoken to the defendant striking him about the head and body with a baseball bat. Having lost consciousness, his next recollection was of her standing over him with a knife, which she used to slash his face so deeply the bone was exposed. He fled and raised the alarm, asserting that the defendant had not only caused the extensive injuries to him, she had also slashed the chest of her boyfriend in her drunken rage. Body-worn footage during the arrest showed the defendant apologising to her daughter and acknowledging that she would always protect her.

On being interviewed that same day, the defendant asserted that she had no memory of the events, being a sufferer of memory impairment that had developed following a decade of serious mistreatment by two ex-husbands, the second of whom had on many occasions satisfied his serial killer-inspired fetishes by breaking her bones before raping her and threatening her with death if she reported the injuries to the police or medical services.

Counsel advised on the instruction of a consultant forensic psychiatrist who diagnosed dissociative amnesia and triggers that would include the circumstances in which the defendant had found herself in the early hours of that morning. He then persuaded the Crown to accept, as admitted fact, that the defendant’s inability to recollect was genuine and that no inference against her should be drawn. Thereafter, he advised on the building of a circumstantial case to rebut the eye-witness account of the friend. A series of defence enquiries and disclosure requests of the prosecution revealed a picture of the friend as an abusive, opportunistic and predatory womaniser and the then-boyfriend of the defendant as an unstable character and knife-carrying offender with a number of convictions involving the use and carriage of weapons.

Based upon meticulously-planned cross-examination of the defendant’s daughter, who had heard an argument between the defendant and the friend in the living room before the boyfriend had entered, and through the presentation of evidence that suggested on balance that the boyfriend, who had earlier in the evening become upset with his friend when the latter had sought to take advantage of the defendant when she was incapacitated through intoxication, counsel asserted that it was the boyfriend who had been possessed of better motive, opportunity and capacity, that the jury should prefer the conclusion that there had in fact been a short, armed and brutal fight between the hulking, combat-trained men, rather than one involving the drunken, five-foot, six stone defendant, and that despite the absence of any positive case being available to the defendant, the circumstantial, inferential conclusions drawn together by counsel in his closing speech should be preferred over the only eye-witness account relied upon by the Crown.

It should be added that the defendant said of the blood-stained baseball bat, which had been inscribed with the Shakespearian quote, ‘Though she be but little, she is fierce’ that it was a gift she had never used.

The subsequent acquittal was unanimous - Bournemouth Crown Court

(… and counsel’s application that the bat be returned to her was also successful.)

R v Akbari & ors. – [2020-22] Class A drug supply (meths), criminal property

Counsel, leading Sophie Chaplin, successfully defended a complex and factually ugly trial requiring fearless cutthroat defences against all three co-defendants. The same was rendered all the more problematic with the defendant having being placed at the head of the indictment. In addition, the defendant was already a serving prisoner, having received a substantial custodial sentence the previous year for cooking crystal meths in substantial quantities in a kitchen he had been running for that purpose in central London.

The trial in Harrow Crown Court had been listed for two weeks, but ran for eight. On the first day, the Crown served in excess of 60k pages of telecommunications download, primarily at the behest of co-defendants seeking to use parts of it against the defendant. It was the second defendant’s case that she had been enslaved by the defendant and used as a courier for drug supply and for prostitution. This came to be supported mid-trial when the NRM returned a ‘conclusive grounds’ finding that she was indeed a victim of modern slavery at the hands of the defendant. She alleged too having been raped by the defendant and being in mortal fear of him, and exhibited several recordings in which she was subject to a tirade of serious violent and sexual abuse from the defendant. She also claimed that the defendant had kidnapped their dog and then sent her videos of the dog being tortured, a matter that alarmed the court to the extent that the judge insisted on seeing the videos before they were shown in public to the jury. The two other co-defendants made similar allegations of having been in fear of the defendant, claiming that the drugs found at their home address were in fact the defendant’s and they had been too afraid of him to prevent him using their home as a store house or calling the police.

A key and very bold tactical decision taken early in the trial was to allow without objection the introduction of any and all bad character evidence against the defendant. It was accepted that he was indeed, at times, a foul-mouthed and angry man, that he was also a dealer and user of drugs and a cook of crystal meth, and that he had an extensive and ever-expanding list of significant moral failings. In response to being challenged in cross-examination about what were said to be ridiculous denials that his disclosed bank accounts revealed numerous £100 payments for recognised deals of crystal meths, he replied, ‘I don’t deal in grammes, I deal in kilos.’ And so the defence case was that those particular drugs and stash of money were not in fact from his nefarious operations, but that they belonged to the co-defendants, who were in fact running brothels and dealing of their own volition to a customer base of their own creation, and, that most unfairly, they were all seeking to blame him because of his easy to establish turpitude.

Swift work with the substantial downloads allowed the defence to identify material that cut down the second defendant’s case, demonstrating her drug dealing at a high level and her independence as a well-remunerated and often kept prostitute. Numerous letters, professing her continued love for the defendant also cast substantial doubt on her slavery claims. The NRM finding was excluded on legal argument and subsequent and extensive cross-examination demonstrated the NRM must have been misled extensively by the second defendant. As to the dog torture videos, they transpired to be no more than oral threats on camera, with a bemused-looking animal probably wondering why its master was behaving so strangely. Several weeks of solid work by the defence team established evermore clearly that the third defendant was running a brothel independently, and likely employing the second and fourth defendants, and that whilst the defendant might have had some involvement with brothel’s involving the second defendant, that was no more than further character evidence that did not support the cases of the prosecution or the co-defendants.

This was, in summary, a hard-fought defence mounted from the top of the indictment, evidenced through the presentation of cut-throat defences against every other co-accused. Despite detailed and initially compelling allegations of modern slavery, historic rape, violent enforcement, harassment, stalking, burglary, theft and laundering money abroad in the context of the sex trade in London all being levelled against the defendant, counsel fought them off. The factual matrix was vast, spanning several years, with much of the key evidence buried amongst the voluminous telephone downloads that were not provided until after the start of the trial. Long hours, often late into the night, were devoted to the response of legal arguments presented with almost no notice.  Nonetheless, the character of the defendant and the strength of the evidence notwithstanding, counsel’s closing speech was all but unanswerable.

The defendant was acquitted on all seven counts. – Harrow Crown Court.

R v Hamid & ors. [2019-22] Conspiracy to supply Class A drugs, concealing criminal property, attempting to remove criminal property, telecommunications offences from within HMP

This was a massive class A drugs supply conspiracy shut down by Operation Topaz. Counsel represented the main defendant, referred to as ‘The drug King of Maldon’.

The defendant had for many years been running an exceptionally profitable drugs network through a large part of Essex. The same was of such a scale that he had acquired numerous luxury cars, including a Rolls Royce and sports cars, such as a Lamborghini. He also had a number of villas overseas, some under construction. The turnover was said to be well into seven figures or even higher, though a conservatively calculated annual figure of at least £1.8M was eventually agreed. The weight of the evidence was substantially increased by covert surveillance and telecommunications recordings that had been gathered during the lead up to the arrests and thereafter.

Whilst the nature of the evidence was such that a plea to the indictment was a forgone conclusion, the real issue was the effective management of the damage that would be done to the defendant’s position by the numerous co-conspirators trying to blame him and thus offload liability for their own ills. Not only did this involve a number of cutthroat positions, it also included a substantial amount of sensitive material which had to be considered with great care.

The defendant’s position was complicated by his own mental ill-health, to a degree exacerbated by his egregious consumption of his own drugs and recently compounded by a kidnapping incident where he had been held hostage by a rival gang and tortured extensively. Much consideration had to be given to these issues, both when taking and weighing his instructions and in dealing with a considerable number of professional issues that arose during the life of the case. 

Further complications arose due to the defendant seeking to continue his operation through the use of illicit phones whilst remanded, resulting in further indictments, and thus entrenching his already difficult position.

The screen of businesses used for the funnelling of the monies presented an extremely complex picture, not least because of the partial nature of the records remaining and the involvement of several co-defendants with those businesses. Forensic accountancy services had to be engaged in order to unravel this most confused aspect of the case.

Despite the weight of the evidence and the ongoing like offending engaged in whilst on remand, counsel managed to secure a sentence of 12 years in relation to the drugs with six years consecutive for the financial, telecoms and other offending.

R v James & ors. [2018-21] Importation of Cannabis and removal of criminal property from the jurisdiction

Counsel, leading Sophie Chaplin, defended an alleged conspirator in a substantial drugs importation case that had lasted two months. Although most of those charged had pleaded guilty, the defendant, a vulnerable man with longstanding mental health difficulties and exceptionally tragic personal circumstances, had consistently refused to accept the overwhelming case against him.

Both counsel worked extremely hard to bring to life the defendant’s explanations as to how he had for so long been so close to those at the very top of the dealing operation, even traveling to and from Spain with them on numerous occasions. The task was rendered harder still because the Crown only disclosed significant material, not relied upon in the presentation of their own case, some four years after the arrest of the defendant and several days after the commencement of the trial. The defence case required explanation of covertly obtained conversations sourced from listening devices deployed during the many months of HMRC surveillance and detailed telecommunications and social media analysis, including, as is sometimes the way in conspiracies, evidence of conversations between others describing details of the defendant’s alleged involvement with both the movement of drugs and the export of monies derived from their sale. As if that was not enough, the defendant also suffered with memory impairment and was unable to provide any explanation for some of the most damaging elements of the prosecution case.

Miss Chaplin kept a close eye on the fragile defendant and offered such support as she could throughout the trial, while counsel charted his course through the evidential minefield. The jury acquitted unanimously on both counts and the defendant was able to return home, to spend valuable time with the terminally ill members of his immediate family. – Kingston Crown Court.

R v Kiani [2021] False imprisonment of a child, ABH

Counsel represented a father who took the law into his own hands after he and his family had endured months of racial abuse at the hands of a gang of delinquent youths.

The defendant’s home had been the focus of numerous attacks, with local children banging on his doors and windows and shouting racist obscenities through the letterbox, terrifying his wife and infant child. After hoping for several months that they would eventually desist, he realised this was not to be. One Friday evening during Ramadan in 2019, just as he and his wife were about to break their fast, there came the first of the evening’s disturbances. Having spotted the gang approaching for a second time, the defendant had opened the door and chased one of them. It was alleged by the Crown that together with his brother he beat up the thirteen year old he had later caught, after failing to run him down with his car. Despite a conversation about putting the youth in the boot, they told him to get into the back of his car, whereupon he was locked in and driven around the area, subjected to further assaults, generally terrified and then dumped at the roadside near his mother’s home later that evening, but only following calls to the youth’s father stating that the boy would be killed for what he and his friends had been doing. There was medical and photographic evidence of multiple injuries.

Arrested later that evening for kidnap, the defendant gave numerous confessions in interview; accepting assaults, accepting driving the youth around in his car and accepting calling the injured boy’s friends and family to make further threats. He denied that it was a kidnap, but little else. He asserted too that he had acted alone. A year later, despite the service of CCTV evidence, the defendant maintained his stance, which was not a defence to any of the counts on the indictment, in a brief defence statement.

Counsel was instructed on the eve of the trial, took instructions at court, declined the Crown’s offer of a plea deal on day one and rewrote the entire defence statement on day two; resiling from the interview, asserting that the defendant’s brother was in fact there and was responsible for any loss of control and resultant injury, albeit the defendant had slapped the youth once, and denying any conversations that had previously been admitted to have occurred in the car during the subsequent carriage. It was further advanced that the youth and his father had concocted much of the detail of their account to cover for the youth’s overtly racist behaviour and that the defendant had lied only to protect his brother and because he had not wanted to bother the police with the full story of the preceding anti-social racist behaviour, something he had given a substantially inconsistent account about in interview. On the third day counsel drafted an application to preclude cross-examination of the defendant at any time save the beginning of the next available morning session, on account of the unfairness that would otherwise be caused by experienced prosecuting counsel being allowed to cross-examine a man who was fasting, caring for a new born during the night and otherwise substantially disadvantaged. The Learned Judge acceded to the application. In relation to the crucial background, counsel identified four witnesses in support of the defendant at the beginning of the second week and had them all proofed and called to court in less than 24 hours.

The defendant was a senior manager at a well known media company, had a second daughter born ten days before trial, and faced several years in prison on conviction, together with the loss of his career and his home.

On the eighth day of a trial that was supposed to run for no more than four, the jury acquitted unanimously. – Reading Crown Court.

R v Smith & ors [2020-21] Attempted murder - Orchestrated gang revenge attack arising from unresolved drug debts.

The defendant was the leader of a drug dealing gang who had sought to enforce a debt from a former client who was himself a part of a locally well-known, mostly criminally-minded family. On the day of their mother’s funeral, that family, having gathered together to grieve, decided also to deal with the defendant for having had the temerity to seek payment for drugs he had previously provided them with. They set up a meeting, on the pretence they had his money, but instead armed themselves with knives and metal bars and set up an ambush at the end of an alley down which they anticipated he would have to travel. When the defendant, approaching from a different direction, spotted them, he left the area and then exchanged threats with them by phone. The family then visited the defendant’s mother’s home address and smashed their way inside, one of them entering through a window, causing considerable damage, and issuing threats that they would kill the defendant. They then proceeded to an underpass nearby and demanded the defendant attend, lest they be required to go back and cause further harm to his family. The defendant summonsed other members of his gang and attended as required, albeit that he and his friends came armed. They then charged the family who had anticipated overwhelming him with their superior numbers. The defendant and one of his co-defendants rushed the nearest family member, delivering multiple stab wounds with their knives, which resulted in the other family members all running away. Unfortunately for the defendant, all of this had been captured on CCTV cameras at the location. He was arrested several days later, both for this and drug dealing offences.

The case required extensive cross-examination of a number of extremely hostile prosecution witnesses as well as very close analysis of various CCTV cameras. The defence case also required the piecing together of numerous preceding events so as to present the jury with a compelling picture of the altercation, explaining the defendant’s position and justifying, in so far as we were able, why it had been necessary for him to have stabbed the complainant in the neck and elsewhere. Counsel also had to work hard to put as attractively as possible a history of drug dealing and other offending in front of the jury, such that they might, notwithstanding the inescapability of the criminality of the defendant’s conduct, be minded to at least consider his account.

The defendant was young and had a complex and most unfortunate family background. He required careful management to ensure he remained focused during such a serious trial.

The defendant was acquitted of attempted murder, convicted of the lesser s.18 offence and counsel was able to secure a sentence below 10 years. – Reading Crown Court.

For more cases see Janick's serious crime cv

Janick’s experience as a heavyweight criminal defence barrister makes him highly sought in defending private road traffic instructions. His keen eye for legal argument and advanced case handling skills ensure that the fee-paying client receives the best service possible.

Whereas some solicitors may take substantial funds and afford the client a junior, inexperienced counsel, those solicitors instructing Janick are the ones ready to go the extra distance for the client, prepare their cases thoroughly together with counsel and bring to bear the same tactics and consideration that would be seen in a murder or armed robbery trial.

Significant private fees are however required. As any competent solicitor will tell you, careful preparation and attention to detail cannot be provided on anything as low as legal aid rates for the majority of such cases. Further, to secure Janick’s availability, other lengthier work has invariably to be returned or instruction refused.

Notable Cases:

(Greater detail is given in respect of some road traffic case examples than in other areas of the CV so as to demonstrate the completeness of the preparation engaged in.)

R v Leeman [2022] dangerous driving, speeding, diving under the influence of cocaine

The defendant was alleged to have consumed a significant quantity of cocaine, such that he was sixteen times over the legal limit, before boarding his pickup truck at night. When police tried to stop him, he rammed one of them out of the way, then sped off through the centre of Maldon, reaching speeds of 100mph, eventually striking a roundabout, which sent his truck into the air. On landing it crashed, causing irreparable damage. Through careful gathering and presentation of character and mental health evidence, counsel was able to persuade the court that an immediate prison sentence was not necessary in this case.

R v Saitch [2018-19] speeding

The defendant was caught by a motorway speed camera at 101mph. She argued that she had been doing no more than 70mph. Her case appeared supported by her father who was travelling in the car immediately behind and had not been caught by the same automated camera.

The Crown sought to rely upon the sufficiency of their own equipment and the possibility that the defendant’s father’s car might have been obscured by a fortuitously placed HGV. Nonetheless, counsel deployed a case statement with disclosure list requiring various materials from the Crown which, over the course of subsequent hearings, they erroneously claimed already to have supplied or which they said were not disclosable. After repeated hearings the Crown eventually conceded the matter and the defendant was acquitted and awarded costs. (Staines Magistrates Court.)

R v Ilgin Williams [2016-17] failing to provide

The defendant was charged having failed to provide a specimen of breath at the road side and then again at the police station. On the latter occasion she had had no fewer than six opportunities, all of which had been recorded on video.

The defence case was that she had just been the victim of a sustained assault at the hands of her boyfriend and had been so traumatised that she had been unable to summon sufficient breath to satisfy the roadside requirements. Thereafter, her trauma had been compounded by her arrest and detention and she had been in such a state that she could not provide the sample as required, even though she had tried her best.

The Crown asserted, without evidence, that there had been no assault upon her, that the same was a convenient excuse to evade liability and that she had failed the tests deliberately because she knew she was over the limit. Officers gave the traditional accounts of slurred speech, glazed eyes and the smell of intoxicating liquor on her breath.

On the advice of counsel, expert reports were obtained from two eminent practitioners; a pathologist and a psychiatrist. The Crown were also pressed in respect of their defective disclosure. The officers, both on the scene and in charge of the investigation were challenged in relation to the observation of their duties and their honesty.

The defence established that there had indeed been a serious assault on the complainant, that her injuries were consistent with multiple recent trauma, that she was mentally shocked by what had occurred, that the same had been compounded by the conduct of the police, that she had subsequently developed post-traumatic stress disorder and that it was most unlikely she would at the material time have been able to comply with the requests for a sample of her breath. It was also established that the officer in charge o the case had lied in relation to the conduct of her investigation. Of particular concern, she had been unable to explain how it was that photographs showing fresh injuries on the defendant’s face, taken on her arrival at the police station, had been buried during the original trial and had then surfaced following defence pressure.

The defendant was a lady of hitherto impeccable character, mother of a special needs child and experienced school teacher. She stood to lose a great deal on conviction. She was acquitted following a three day trial. (Snaresbrook Crown Court)

R v Foster-Jones (No.2) [2014-15] failing to provide

Following on from his acquittal for dangerous driving, the CPS decided to prosecute the defendant for his having failed to provide a sample of breath when required to do so at the police station. The defence case.

For more cases see Janick's Private Road Traffic CV

DIRECTORY RECOMMENDATIONS / QUOTATIONS:

“Janick’s extensive knowledge of technicalities allows him to be able to advise swiftly, and accurately; and also to present compelling arguments before the court.”

“Janick’s written submissions struck the first blow to the Crown’s case; the second, fatal blow to the prosecution was dealt with in his challenge to the witnesses’ evidence.”

PROFILE:

An experienced and heavyweight criminal defence practitioner, Janick is called upon when a fight is required. Never one to shy away from a direct assault upon the prosecution case, he is exactly the type of barrister sought by clients who expect to see attack as part of their defence.

As can be seen from the high-profile nature of cases he has been asked to defend, Janick is fluent in pre-trial tactics, expert instruction and analysis, and the deployment of searching disclosure arguments. Abuse of process is also one of his favoured specialities.

Fraud cases in which Janick is instructed are often international. His ability to read around topics relevant to the case, whether that be the dispersal of assets during Chiang Kai-Chek’s China during the second world war or the disintegration of society and medical ills in post-independence Congo, has often afforded his clients a leading edge.

Janick is a keen and effective jury advocate, approachable to clients and tactically astute.

He has a good deal of experience in the Court of Appeal and the Administrative Court, having taken numerous points on conviction and sentence.

NOTABLE CASES:

R v Halim & ors (trials 1 and 2) [2018-19] – Conspiracy to defraud

The defendant, a high street bank employee, was alleged to have been instrumental in allowing fraudsters to walk into her branch and, often without proper documentation, leave with substantial sums of money. The loss to the bank was millions. The Crown’s evidence included forensic analysis of banking records, consideration of branch CCTV showing the defendant’s conduct and the bank’s own internal investigations. A search of the defendant’s home had also revealed that she had retained PIN details and correspondence of a recently defrauded account.

The defendant’s case, notwithstanding evidence that appeared overwhelming, was that the impression the defendant may have given through her conduct was wrong and that she had in fact been targeted by a well-organised criminal gang on account of her unfamiliarity with her role. Further, the bank’s investigation of her was inherently dishonest and had deliberately exposed her to prosecution when in fact she ought to have been exonerated.

Counsel, who had only been instructed 48 hours before the first trial, established during cross-examination of the bank’s investigator that disclosure to the Crown had been partial and partisan. Moreover, it appeared that the bank’s lead investigator may have misled the court on oath. The trial duly collapsed.

During the retrial, counsel established through lengthy cross-examination a raft of questionable conduct engaged in by the bank’s lead investigator, as well as potential involvement in serious crime by the branch management. Legal arguments and repeated recalling of the investigator revealed an evermore troubling picture of dishonesty and discreditable practices that included misleading the police, misleading the Court on oath, excusing likely criminal conduct by others, failing to pass on material that assisted the defence and seeking to stop witnesses from assisting the defence. The position was further compounded by the police who had failed to spot and act on these events. Counsel ran several arguments to exclude evidence and to stay proceedings as an abuse of process. The second abuse of process argument was unanswerable and the prosecution case was stayed. – Southwark Crown Court.

R v Walker & ors [2018-19] – Money Laundering

The defendant was one of twelve caught in an operation that identified high level theft of monies from a high street bank, followed by a complex process of laundering the proceeds.

The case featured close analysis of the various links between the offenders, particularly through forensic searches of electronic media data.

Complicating this defendant’s position was the fact that he had only recently been acquitted of an almost identical laundering offence, having run the same defence of innocent association. Further, on the face of the papers before the jury in this case, there was evidence of involvement in a third, similar conspiracy. In relation to that latter evidential issue, counsel succeeded in having the evidence excluded. The defendant was acquitted. – Inner London Crown Court

R v Bakker, Scheffer & another (trials 1,2 and 3) [2007 – 2016] - Corruption

The defence of a UN consulting agent charged with alleged corruption offences along with the co-director of their NGO. The third defendant is the company solicitor. The allegation concerns the illegal facilitation of award after bidding for an $80 million UNDP Congolese medical aid grant to Missionpharma, an approved Danish UNDP long term contract provider.

The case was described even in its early stages as one of the most complex the LSC had seen.

Counsel was instructed pre-charge to advise on tactics. Having provided advice throughout the interview stage and through the lower court, counsel oversaw the creation of two defence teams for the first two defendants. Acting thereafter for Scheffer, instructed by three firms of solicitors to date and led variously by Sir Ivan Lawrence QC, Sir Allan Green QC, Gareth Rees QC and Christopher Sallon QC, counsel has been a constant presence throughout the lengthy litigation process.

The case has featured extensive background research, counsel having studied the in-country situation in the DRC. Multi-national disclosure requests of complexity and length have been drafted. Foreign and UN law and procedure have been scrutinised. Several abuse of process arguments have been compiled. This in addition to all of the usual preparations necessary in bringing a complex fraud to trial. - Southwark Crown Court.

R v Lynch-Harwood [2015-16] – Fraud

The defendant had pretended to her employers that she was dying of cancer when in fact she was arranging a situation that would allow her to work from home, have time off and cover for her increasing alcoholism. The deception was complex, involving research into the fabricated condition and the production of letters, purporting to be from medical practitioners, that had been forged. She also stole a six-figure sum from a company tax account and used her position to cover the losses. Her actions were eventually discovered when the CEO, who also had cancer, arranged for flowers to be sent to the hospital where he understood her to be undergoing treatment, only to find them sent back with a message that the hospital had no records of any such patient. The subsequent enquiry revealed a loss in high six figures and significant damage to the company and its prospects in a very competitive market. Although there were no realistic prospects of an acquittal, counsel succeeded over several months in limiting significantly the defendant’s culpability and accordingly secured a very low sentence. – Wood Green Crown Court.

Day & Day v Barker [2013-14] – Malicious prosecution:

The claimants (husband and wife) had been the victim of the defendant's road rage attack.  He drove around their car dangerously, drove at Mr. Day, and rammed their car twice. Having followed and apprehended him, the Mr. Day became involved in an altercation as the defendant fought to escape. On arrival at the scene, the police wrongly arrested Mr. Day, the defendant having alleged that it was the claimant who had driven dangerously. The criminal allegation was swiftly dispatched following counsel's pleadings. The claimants then launched an action against the defendant for malicious prosecution and the damages, physical and emotional, as a result. The defendant’s solicitors contended that their client, though conceding the physical damage occasioned, could not be held responsible for the institution of the criminal prosecution. Counsel averred otherwise. The defendant capitulated, affording significant damages to both claimants as well as costs. Basildon County Court.

R v Wells [2012-14] – Fraud:

The defendant, a GP practice manager was charged in a very serious and extensive accusation of fraud against her employers. Counsel was instructed also to oversee the tactical preparation of the defence generally, the second defendant being the daughter and assistant practice manager. It was said by the prosecution that the first defendant had claimed for additional hours, far in excess of what she could have worked, over a period of several years. Further, that petty cash monies had been repeatedly stolen, direct cash payments were not banked and jobs given to family members who similarly took far greater remuneration than they had been entitled to. The defence case was that the practice, run incompetently and dishonestly by the two partners, had worked the first defendant into the ground. She had been the glue holding the practice together, regularly working sixteen hour days, through weekends and holidays. The defence established through emails and expert analysts that work had been undertaken regularly late into the night and from the very early hours of the morning. In addition, her work boosted practice revenue significantly. The defence contended that the partners had conspired to rid themselves of the defendant to prevent the discovery of serious tax discrepancies for which they were responsible. Issue was taken with the Crown’s preparation and investigation and a lengthy abuse of process argument was readied. The Crown discontinued the case when the defendant developed an aggressive, terminal cancer. Guildford Crown Court.

Knights v Wessex Funding Ltd [2013] – Fraud:

Counsel acted for the parent company of a porn brokers accused by a woman of selling her jewelry given them by a thief or handler following an alleged burglary of her home. The claim was a fraud. The claimant had permitted her husband, a man previously jailed for dishonesty, to porn the jewelry, obtain monies and then seek to recover the considerable value of the jewelry on the subsequent false claim. The case required close analysis of complex facts and background sources in order to unmask the fraudulent claim. The defence case was made all the more difficult by absent witnesses, faulty CCTV and the porn brokers having closed down prior to the hearing of the case. The claim was dismissed and the defendant awarded costs in full. Maidstone County Court.

Re: D [2013] - Restraint proceedings:

Instructed on behalf of the ex.parte company, counsel was tasked with seeking to lift a restraint order imposed against an escrow agent's accounts while he was the subject of an ongoing City of London Police investigation. The Applicant company, based in Switzerland and trading in the rare earth element oxide market, had been forced to suspend trading due to the frozen funds, latterly alleged to be improperly accrued, though little evidence in support of the same was provided. The case featured the late production by police of large volumes of material, some of it complex, far less of it relevant. Identification of the salient issues was paramount. - Plymouth Crown Court.

R v Sandhu & others [2011] – Conspiracy to defraud:

Counsel was specifically recommended and instructed for the first defendant in a multi-handed conspiracy concerning the setting up of fake accounts in order to filter client funds to other institutions. The defendant was a Barclays Bank manager with a high level of access. The evidence on the papers appeared overwhelming, coming from a number of sources, including phone data, banking analysis and fingerprinting. Counsel was chosen due to his reputation for fighting after previous counsel had been sacked for pressurising the defendant to plead.

This was a case in which counsel had to be alive to potential conflicts and cut-throat defences being run by any of the four co-defendants, all lower down on the indictment. The trial featured a range of unheralded difficulties, including the Crown objecting to the defendant quite intentionally running two defences, a prosecution handwriting expert who was served mid-trial and inferential patterns drawn from a variety of phone data charts.  – Birmingham Crown Court.

R v O’Donnell & others [2010 – 11] – Environmental offences and money laundering:

Leading Counsel, instructed to lead Gudrun Young, in defending one of four charged in the largest ever environmental prosecution of its kind.

The defendants had set up unlicensed waste collection operations and then deposited huge amounts of building and other debris onto a site of special scientific interest.  In areas the land level had been raised by four metres. Almost four million pounds was then said to have been laundered through a variety of companies.  The case concerned complex analytical evidence in respect of the environmental issues as well as a substantial amount of financial documentation and surveillance material.

Leading counsel’s robust, uncompromising approach was the reason for his instruction and his defendant was the only one to be acquitted. – Reading / Isleworth Crown Court.

R v Lim and others [2006 - 7] – counterfeiting, fraud

Junior to Gregory Bull QC, representing the ringleader of the largest counterfeiting in British history. The defendant had headed an international team of conspirators who had flown to the UK and presented £180,000,000 in forged £500,000 notes to the Bank of England for realisation, the tip of a claim that was said to amount to £900 billion.

The background to the case required counsel to have a detailed knowledge of the financial and political position of Chiang Kai-Chek’s republican government during the years of Japan’s Manchurian occupation of China, both before and during the second world war.

The case featured analysis of the Bank of England’s procedures over the past 80 years, counterfeiting expertise and evidence of banking processes in Holland.

Having persuaded the trial judge, after an eight day submission of no case, to remove the matter from the jury, the Crown lodged an appeal against the terminatory ruling.

The Court of Appeal upheld the original ruling, with the defendant acquitted and awarded costs. – Southwark Crown Court / Court of Appeal.

Janick’s skills as an experienced criminal defence counsel translate well into the litigious realms of judicial review, regulatory and tribunal work. Increasingly called upon to deal with local government and executive matters as well as complaint or disciplinary procedures, Janick is alive to the fact that these cases are likely to have exceptionally serious consequences for individuals, their careers and businesses. Janick deploys the same thorough and ruthless approach in dealing with each of these cases as he would to a jury trial.

With his keen eye for detail, Janick heads straight for the core elements of each action, directing the approach around the salient issues and ensuring the best chances for success. Many of the cases in which he is instructed collapse against his clients before the hearing occurs.

As a specialist in criminal law, Janick comes regularly into contact with the police. His detailed knowledge of codes of practice, policing policies, methods and evolving issues make him well placed to offer tactical advice, draft pleadings and execute actions in this area.

Unlike many practitioners, Janick has no personal or political bias toward either the executive or a civilian complaining of wrongs occasioned by them, preferring instead to throw his weight behind any cause where justice should be done. Janick has represented serving officers, individuals assaulted and injured by the police and those who have a grievance arising from a failure by the police to act in accordance with their duties.

Janick accepts instructions in these areas from all funding sources.

Janick Can be instructed for a preliminary conference and / or written advice where the client wishes to receive an indication of their prospects ahead of launching any action.

Notable cases:

Guildford Borough Council  and Epsom and Ewell Borough Council v Heather  - (2022) – breach of s.179 enforcement notice

The defendant was served with an enforcement notice, barring him from keeping trade waste at his residential property after neighbours who had previously intimidated other residents, made unwarranted complaints to the council. The defendant challenged the notice through the council’s internal procedures, asserting that he had only held materials which came from the renovation of that residential property, but was knocked back. Subsequently and investigator came, took photos and instituted the prosecution.

The defendant and his family were so incensed that they decided to fight the unjust prosecution in its entirety. Counsel was instructed and identified immediately the multiplicity of evidential failings that beset the prosecution case. In addition, it was plain that the usual safeguards that preclude prosecutions that have no merit had been ignored.

The prosecution was eventually discontinued and the defendant formally acquitted. The prosecution then tried to resist the application for the defendant’s legal costs to be paid directly by them. They failed, and the defendant was awarded his costs in full, nearly £20k. – Guildford Crown Court.

Channer v the Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police - (2021) – removal of prohibition on possession of firearms

Because the Applicant had been given a suspended sentence exceeding three months, he was required by statute to surrender his firearms, held lawfully under license. The ban was automatic under the Act and precluded him even shooting with other people’s guns, even at authorized events. This was particularly difficult for the defendant as he was a keen shot and an experienced one who had participated at a high level for many years.

Counsel settled argument for a removal of the ban and succeeded in persuading the Court that the same should be lifted with immediate effect. – Reading Crown Court.

Inquest into the death of XX – (2020)

Counsel represented an IP (the husband of the deceased). The deceased, a tetraplegic for some years before her death, had sustained a C4 spinal fracture following an RTA when her partner had run her over following an argument in 2012. Her subsequent condition and treatment was exceptionally complex, as reflected in the substantial medical notes and expert reports. In the months before her death she had been beset by numerous, potentially life-threatening difficulties, many recurrent and most requiring hospital stays. She died in January 2016 following a suspected, illicit administration of insulin. The police had investigated the IP as a suspect for murder, during which an eminent consultant concluded that the only explanation for the medical findings was poisoning, highlighting in his report previous hypoglycaemic episodes and excluding all other possibilities. The only common presence was the IP. None of the served evidence appeared to exculpate the IP. Eight consultants and two professors provided reports.

Through extensive cross-examination over several days, it was demonstrated that there were other possible causes of death, alone or in combination, resulting in unlawful killing being excluded. The narrative verdict absolved the IP completely. He was never charged with murder.

Counsel was instructed only three weeks before the inquest and had immediately got to grips with the complexities of the case, including instructing and having served a crucial expert report from a professor of biomedical science, despite not even having the full records of the deceased before the day of trial.

Counsel conducted detailed cross-examination of numerous consultants through areas they were specialist in, demonstrating on the final day that the expert consultant who had alleged poisoning had ignored key, exculpatory material, declined to consider medical accounts that undermined his own preferred theory and had wedded himself to a conclusion that was not the only explanation for death.

The IP had for four years lived with the incorrect suggestions and allegations that he had killed his partner of 30 years. He was publicly exonerated. – Woking Coroners Court.

Environment Agency v Channer & or – (2019-20) – deposition of controlled waste, failing to prevent breaches of s.33 EPA, incineration of waste, failing to provide descriptions with transfer, failing to provide transfer notices

The defendant, a farmer who had previously been convicted and sentenced for like offences, found himself again facing prosecution by the Environment Agency for repeated and flagrant breaches of the Environmental Protection Act. In short, he was storing and burning substantial quantities of waste, without license and incinerating a large proportion of it on farmland. He was jointly charged with his son, who had conducted most of the activities giving rise to the breaches, and over whom the defendant had ever-decreasing control, notwithstanding his ownership of the land.

Counsel advised on the compilation of mitigation, including vast amounts of character references together with evidentially supported accounts of the difficulties, financial and physical, in the management and removal of such waste for farmers. He advised too on how to separate evidentially the defendant from his wayward son. Counsel subsequently ran an argument submitting that the defendant and his son could be severed, the lesser position of the father entitling him to remain in the lower court for sentence. The District Judge agreed with the submissions, and the defendant was subsequently sentenced but avoided immediate imprisonment. His son was sent to the Crown Court, where he was sentenced to imprisonment. – High Wycombe Magistrates Court.

Trading Standards v Karetnikov and Karetnikova – (2018-19) - sale of counterfeit goods

Counsel acted for both husband and wife who had set up an online Ebay shop trading particularly in counterfeit Disney stock and falsely branded electrical goods, the majority sourced from the Far East.

The case was difficult to manage, featuring a complicated financial background and issues relating to potentially relevant previous conduct.

During the course of proceedings counsel secured the award of wasted costs against the prosecution in relation to their dilatory and generally unacceptable conduct, in particular failing to prepare and present their case in a timely manner.

Despite the overwhelming evidential position presented initially by the prosecution, counsel secured the acquittal of the husband on all eleven charges and the wife, having pleaded to limited offences, avoided immediate imprisonment. – Croydon Crown Court.

Trading Standards v Weller & ors – (2017-19) –  sale of counterfeit goods

Counsel represented the ringleader of a group selling significant quantities of luxury counterfeit goods on a number of internet sites, even after Trading Standards had identified what was happening and attempted to close down the operation. Monies generated by the operation was said to have been in six figures.

The defendant was alleged to have enlisted both his partner and other women with whom he had been in a relationship into his scheme and set up a network covering a significant area.

In spite of the overwhelming evidence, continuation after cease and desist requests and the plea being entered very shortly before trial, counsel managed to secure a sentence that avoided immediate imprisonment and kept the confiscation penalty limited to £20k. – Reading Crown Court.

R v Price

Price v The Chief Constable of Essex - (2011 - 2016) - Claim for damages

After an argument with his then girlfriend, the police were called to her address in respect of a minor criminal damage. Subsequently, having spoken with the client, they attended his address in the small hours of the morning. Purporting to effect an arrest, the four officers subjected the client to a savage assault that left him with multiple injuries including a lung punctured by his own broken rib. He suffered long term physical and mental harm.

The police managed to compound their position by providing sub-standard care in the aftermath. Thereafter, they charged him with four assaults on police, who had suffered trivial injuries at most, and in one case, no discernible injury at all.

Counsel contested the criminal trial in the magistrates court, securing acquittals on all four assault allegations and the criminal damage matter. The client was awarded his costs.

Counsel is oversaw and challenged the IPCC investigation, into both the conduct of the officers and the conduct of Southend Police who failed to deal with the client’s timely complaint.

High Court proceedings in respect of the damages, arising from various heads, sought by the client were concluded late in 2016 with the defendant accepting liability for significant damages and costs.

Milton Keynes Council v The Original Smoke Shack – (2015) – criminal breaches of planning regulations

The clients had leased a Grade II listed building, a former coaching inn, that had at the turn of the last century been transformed into a pub. They in turn transformed the same into a burger restaurant, undertaking some significant works on all floors of the property. This annoyed the local council who had not been provided, let alone granted, any consent to the works being undertaken. A criminal prosecution was launched by the council, who argued that the special historic and architectural interest of the building had been affected and that the same constituted a number of offences against both directors and the company itself.

Initial legal arguments removed much of the emotive material that the council had sought to deploy. With the case refocused on its core ingredients, the defence challenged the basis of the council’s assertion as to affectation of character. Following a number of hearings, the council’s case was withdrawn in its entirety on the morning of trial.

Anderson v Guildford Justices – (2015) – Judicial Review

Counsel led Naomi Carpenter in a complex and urgent application to preclude the Court from hearing a case in which the Crown were not only significantly at fault with their disclosure obligations but had chosen also to ignore key material and lines of enquiry that tended to exculpate the defendant. With trial fast approaching, mandatory time limits needed to be met in short order to ensure the matter was before the Administrative Court and thus preclude the risk of the trial proceeding in the lower court.

The application was a success, costs were awarded in favour of the client and the case against him in the lower court collapsed shortly thereafter.

Conn v the Chief Constable of Surrey – (2015) – Judicial Review

The defendant had purportedly accepted a caution for an offence he could not have committed. On discovering that he had a criminal record and that the same would preclude works he wanted to undertake in the financial services industry, he contacted solicitors with a view to inviting the police force that had administered the caution to expunge it. They refused.

Counsel was instructed to draft a detailed letter before claim. The same was met with stiff opposition. Counsel accordingly settled pleadings, renewing all points identified in the original correspondence. The resistance to the application collapsed wholesale, the client’s caution was expunged and the police agreed to pay costs.

Price v the Commissioner of the IPCC – (2013-14) - Judicial Review

Following on from his successful defence to four fabricated assault charges by Essex Police, a complaint was made to the IPCC prior to the issuing of civil proceedings for damages. The long overdue report they produced was little more than an exercise in excusing the police. On the advice of counsel, judicial review proceedings were commenced. Despite IPCC grandstanding and threats as to costs, counsel’s written submissions secured leave. The IPCC then capitulated in full just days before the final hearing. They also conceded costs.

R v XM (2006–7) – Jury trial

Counsel led Edward Culver in the defence of a serving police officer accused of perverting the course of justice and possession of illegal ammunition. The case was exceptionally serious, attracting attention from very high-ranking officers and resulting in a significant police presence at court.

Despite the intimidating atmosphere, counsel conducted several weeks of detailed legal argument in respect of psychiatric, confession, forensic and disclosure material.

The trial lasted 52 days, resulting in a hung jury.