Best solicitor for sexual offence

Notable Cases:

R v M

Rape of a child under 16.  This case involved sensitive cross-examination of a vulnerable child over live-link following the advocate’s toolkit principles.

R v D

Historic rape of a child whereby the complainant was asserting she was a lesbian and had never had any interest in males; Will acted for the defence.  Within the unused material, he identified a caution for indecent assault of a male that the complainant accepted just prior to the dates of the indictment.  Therefore, he lodged a skeleton argument to introduce this caution and for leave to cross-examine the complainant upon it by virtue of s.100 CJA 2003, non-defendant bad character and s.41 YJCEA 1999, restrictions on cross-examination of complainant’s sexual history.  Following reference to the leading case of R v Hamadi [2007] and rule 22 CrPR, the application was successful.  This evidence was key in undermining the complainant’s credibility and led to a hung jury.

R v K

A young man was charged along with his friends of Gang Rape of a female in hotel room following complaints made by the alleged victim. However, the men were in possession of videos that were taken during the incident which showed clear consent to sexual acts on her part. CCTV was also available from the hotel which showed that the complainant’s account could not have happened as she stated. A submission of no case to answer was presented to the judge by Will Smout and counsel for the defence. All the defendants were acquitted of Rape.