General Crime

R v K (Isleworth, 2024) – Perverting the Course of Justice – Defending a businessman of good character: a group of men were charged with approaching a vulnerable witness who had given evidence in a rape trial and inducing her to change her account. The eight-week trial involved an abuse of process argument concerning covert human intelligence sources, cross-examining the most vulnerable of witnesses, exposing significant deficiencies in the police investigation and challenging complex cell-site evidence. Client acquitted.

R v G (Aylesbury, 2022 – 2023) – Wounding with intent – Defending a young man accused of repeatedly stabbing a virtual stranger who was lucky to survive: the case involved exploiting deficiencies in prosecution disclosure and contending with concerted “cut-throat” defences by co-defendants. Client acquitted of Wounding with Intent, convicted of Section 20. Henrietta successfully argued that sentence should be restricted to the maximum available at the time of the offence, achieving a very significant reduction.

Homicide

R v B (Central Criminal Court, 2024) – Murder – The victim of a fatal attack had died many years after receiving her injuries; the case involved difficult sentencing issues, since this was effectively a second sentence based on the same facts – the defendant had pleaded guilty to her attempted murder and already served a long sentence for the attack, so it was essential for the Judge to deduct that earlier sentence from his minimum term.

R v S and others (Central Criminal Court, 2022) – Murder – Stabbing case involving difficult issues of joint responsibility (formerly known as “joint enterprise”), as there was cogent evidence of the accused dissociating themselves from the attack by leaving the scene one by one.

R v A (Central Criminal Court, 2021) – Murder – A wealthy middle-aged woman was found beaten to death. The accused was the last to see her alive. The prosecution sought to eliminate everyone else entering/leaving the deceased’s block in a 20 hour period. This was a circumstantial case involving 200+ witnesses, CCTV, cellsite and telephone evidence, 7943 audio calls and recorded prison calls & visits.

R v S (Harrow Crown Court, 2019) – Attempted Murder – Two unrelated stabbings in the context of drug debt and reprisals.

Human trafficking, Modern Servitude and other Serious Organised Crime

R v F and others (Winchester, 2024) – Five men were charged with importing Class A drugs to the UK by sea. The trial ran for nine weeks: it involved assimilating a large volume of Encrochat evidence, dovetailed with complex cell-site evidence and calling six different types of expert evidence.

R v V and others (Isleworth, 2023) – Three men were accused of running a drugs factory from a warehouse in Acton, with a laboratory concealed behind false panelling; according to the police, this was the first UK seizure of a substance called N-Desethyl Isotonitazene – a “designer” synthetic opioid 26 times more potent than Fentanyl which at the time of trial had not yet been classified under the Misuse of Drugs Act. Henrietta later took part in a BBC documentary investigating the supply and abuse of designer opioids.

R v VB and others (Lewes Crown Court, 2022) – Conspiracy to Rob – Six men were investigated for a Conspiracy involving Armed Robberies. The six week trial involved 24,000+ pages of evidence including cell site, telephone messaging, ANPR, handset geolocation, satellite vehicle tracking, CCTV and DNA.

R v D and others (Wood Green, 2021) – Human Trafficking, Modern Servitude and Exploitation through Fraud – four defendants were charged with trafficking a destitute woman from Poland and keeping her as a servant for 5 ½ years, living for much of that time in a garden shed.

R v P and others (Central Criminal Court, 2018) – Human trafficking – one of the first trials based on conspiracy to transport migrants across the Channel in small boats.

Rape and Serious Sexual Offences

Recognised for her skill, commitment and empathy when handling sensitive cases, Henrietta has many years’ wide-ranging experience of conducting trials on allegations of rape and other serious sexual offences, from work-place rape to sexual activity with children. Her work frequently involves allegations of historic and familial sexual abuse and other cases where the accused is said to have been in a position of trust. She has a keen academic interest in the law in this area including the complexities of indictments, “Section 41” (the provision banning cross-examination on previous sexual behaviour) and applicable sentencing provisions, particularly in historic cases.

Henrietta specialises in cases involving vulnerable and child witnesses using Section 28 and other special measures; she has worked extensively with intermediaries. The same skills and understanding are brought to bear in defending vulnerable individuals who may, whether because of their age, neurodiversity, learning difficulties or problems with their mental health, face very considerable challenges in going through the trial process and meeting a criminal.

R v O (2023) – Double rape of two vulnerable men in the context of exploitation through their addictions.

R v S (2020 – 2022) advising – Historic familial sexual abuse – Three adult complainants accused an ex-police officer of sexually abusing them in childhood for a number of years.

R v J (2021) – Child sexual abuse – the accused had used Instagram to target, groom and abuse a vulnerable fourteen-year-old who had chronic anorexia, anxiety and depression. The case involved Section 28 (pre-recorded cross-examination), significant bad character and Section 41 issues.

R v F and others (2020) – Rape and false imprisonment – Four men accused of tricking a young girl into travelling to London, luring her to a deserted stairwell and taking turns to rape her.

R v C (2019) – Kidnap with sexual intent: a stranger attack by a man with a serious psychiatric illness: preliminary issues over fitness to stand trial.

R v P (2019) – Multiple Rapes. A vulnerable woman was reported missing and was rescued by police from the house of her former partner where she said she had been kept for two weeks, being systematically raped and beaten.

R v M (2018) – Rape – A young asylum seeker was charged with grooming and raping two vulnerable teenage girls.

R v S (2016) – Historic familial abuse – A three week trial involving three family members accused of abusing generations of children over four decades; one defendant was ruled unfit to plead; one had significant learning difficulties and used an intermediary.

R v H (2016) – Child sexual abuse – A man and woman were accused of abusing two children together during the 1980s.