+44 (0) 20 7421 8007
An experienced and senior criminal defence advocate who has been involved in many of the most serious of cases involving murder, manslaughter, gang related crime, large drugs conspiracies, rape and serious sexual offences.
Derek has successfully taken cases to the Court of Appeal: recently where he has argued fresh evidence is such that original conviction should be re-opened and the appellant was acquitted, and others where very long sentences have been reduced significantly.
Derek is a cross qualified solicitor and barrister. He was a solicitor from the late 1980’s. from 2005 – 2015 he was the Senior Partner of one of the largest Criminal Defence Practices in the Country. He has been appearing in all courts including magistrates’ courts, county courts, ever since 1990 and appeared full time in the Crown Court since 2007 as a Solicitor Advocate.
In 2017 he transferred to the independent bar.
Key cases
In addition to his extensive Crown Court practice, Derek has acted for military personnel in a range of offences. Members of the Armed Forces charged with criminal offences may be required to answer to them in Courts Martial either abroad or in the UK. The proceedings are crucially different to their civilian counterparts. These are specialist courts.
Derek has regularly represented members of the services as well as associated persons subject to service law. He has a proven track record of appearing in these courts with considerable success. The following are some of the matters in which he has been instructed.
R v ex L.Cpl. LF (2026)
Instructed to represent at LF Court Martial. LF had been accused of fraud by false representation.
R v Capt. TD (2025)
Instructed to defend TD in Court Martial. TD had been accused of sexual assault x3.
R v IJ (2025)
IJ was a teacher serving in an Armed Forces school in Germany in 1980’s. Multiple historic allegations of sexual assaults in the classrooms emerged from his former pupils. The case was of considerable complexity and demands extensive legal knowledge and courtroom experience. During the proceedings Derek cross examined a very vulnerable complainant who has extensive mental health difficulties (conducted by live link under s28 Children and Young Persons Act) and made detailed written and oral submissions to stay the proceedings in respect of another complainant as an abuse of process.
R v AS1. HT (2025)
Defended HT at Court Martial in Bulford accused of two offences of sexual assault against a female friend whilst she stayed overnight in his bedroom. To be guilty of a sexual assault there must be (1) intentional (2) sexual (3) touching (4) without consent and, crucially, (5) HT did not reasonably believe that the complainant did not consent. This trial revolved around HT’s belief that the complainant was consenting to his contact with her.
R v L.Cpl. JM (2025)
Defended JM at Court Martial in Bulford who, whilst stationed in Kenya, had been accused of rape of a female. They had been on a first date together and engaged in consensual sexual intercourse. She alleged that later that night she woke to discover that JM was having intercourse with her which she neither knew about because she was asleep, nor wanted. JM asserted that she was awake and encouraged him and fully participated.
R v Flt Lt. MR (2025)
Defended MR at Court Martial in Catterick charged with rape and sexual assault following a Mess Dinner. The complainant, whom he had spent the latter part of the evening with, returned with him to his quarters. There was kissing and other sexual behaviour. The complainant said that she did not consent. MR’s defence revolved around issues of consent and his reasonable belief that she consented.
R v Cpl. MN (2024)
Defended MN at Court Martial in Bulford charged with importation of psychoactive drugs from the Netherlands. An order was placed on the web for illicit substances. The police were alerted to the activity, and the parcel was tracked coming into the UK and followed to MNs quarters where he resided with his wife and teenage child. The case involved detailed scrutiny of MNs internet activity (who was using the computer and when); his banking activity (who had access to his bank accounts) and whether there was any evidence to rule out the suggestion that others, including his wife and teenage child, might have placed the orders.
R v Flt Lt. TH (2024)
Defended TH at Court Martial in Bulford charged with sexual assault in a nightclub. TH was celebrating because football team he played in had won a local cup for the first time. The same day he was informed that his wife was pregnant. He consumed a lot of alcohol and before he and his football teammates went to a nightclub. He was happily kissing and grabbing both men and women in his drunken state. He grabbed the bottom of a woman whom he did not know. To be guilty the touching needed to be sexual. In trial he argued that the touching was not sexual, it was intended as a joke – in the same way it had been with everyone else he had encountered in that way that evening.
R v ex-Rfn CS (2024)
Defended CS at Court Martial in Bulford charged with conspiracy to supply a substantial quantity (overall approx. 1kg) of class A drugs to other members of the services over many months. The case involved a considerable volume of phone messages and other such data from which the police sought to argue that CS was at the head of the conspiracy, that he had coerced and directed the other conspirators.
R v AS1. JF (2023)
Defended JF at Court Martial in Catterick for offences of grooming children over the internet. He was alleged to have sent indecent images of himself to children. There were charges of possessing indecent images of children, and possession of extreme images. JFs case was that the prosecution could not prove that he had sent the images, or what was shown in them. It was argued that the prosecution could not prove the ages of the people who the police said had been groomed, it could only be inferred from comments. Lastly that the prosecution could not prove the ages of the naked young women in the pictures, so could not prove the offences.
R v S.Sgt AB (2023)
Instructed for AB at Court Martial in Bulford. AB was one of three SNCOs alleged to have assaulted a subordinate [X]. One of the other SNCOs was alleged to have had knife during the assault. AB was able to argue that he was not involved in any assault, whatever the others had done did not involve him. X was behaving violently towards AB. ABs interactions were reasonable and proportionate and measured against the aggression that X was showing towards AB.
R v Cpl SB (2023)
Advised SB on appeal against conviction for 22 charges containing a mixture of sexual assault offences, disgraceful conduct and indecent conduct offences against multiple female junior soldiers.
R v Capt. AM (2023)
Instructed to represent AM, a captain of 25 years’ service, at Bulford Military Court. AM was charged with an offence of misconduct through alcohol contrary to s20(1) Armed Forces Act 2006. Whilst stationed in Cyprus, it was alleged that whilst drunk AM had engaged in sexually inappropriate behaviour with female Lance Corporals.
R v Tpr. MR (2023)
Defended MR at court martial in Bulford in respect of possession of indecent images of children.
R v S.Sgt KP (2023)
Defended KP in the Summary Appeal Court at Bulford against a conviction of ill treatment to a subordinate.
Maj Gen RAB (2022)
Represented RAB in respect of a Major Administrative Action at a 2-day oral hearing of the Army Board (comprising of Gen P Sanders and Lt Gen Nesmith [Chief and Deputy Chief of the General Staff]) at Army headquarters. RAB was accused whilst in drink of being over familiar with a female civilian delegate at a residential course. It was asserted that he had touched her in places and in a way which was unwelcome and alleged thereby that he failed to maintain standards of conduct expected of someone of his rank.
R v Cpl JD (2022)
Instructed for JD appearing in Court Martial in Catterick. JD was alleged to have assaulted another in barracks.
R v S.Sgt. JH (2022)
Instructed to represent JH at Court Martial (Bulford), Staff Sgt charged with offences of fraud arising from representations that he had made in connection with his Forces Help to Buy Loan and wrongful receipt of allowance of get You home Travel.
R v SAC(T) JDS (2021)
Defended MR at Court Martial in Catterick in respect of possession of indecent images of children.
R v Spr HR (2021)
Instructed to represent HR in Court Martial in Bulford. HR was one of three servicemen alleged to have assaulted senior officers in Austria.
R v AC JP (2020)
Represented JP at court martial in Catterick. JP was one of three aircraftsmen charged with harassment and bullying of another during Phase One training.
R v AC WB-K (2020)
Defended WB-K at trial in Court Martial at Catterick. WB-K and another aircraftsman were jointly charged with the rape of a female in her ground floor room in female accommodation. The prosecution said in the process of raping the female the two men were disturbed by others. WB and his co-defendant asserted that the female had invited them into her room, they came through an open window and all three engaged in consensual sexual intercourse.
R v SJ (2019) (Northampton Crown Court)
Defended SJ in confiscation proceedings [lasting 5 days] under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, SJ had been a financial director who committed theft in excess of £2million from the company for whom he worked.
R v HM (2019) (Luton Crown Court)
Defended HM with attempted murder in which his victim was stabbed 11 times.
R v JMC (2019) (St Albans Crown Court)
Defended JMC in a tit-for-tat gang warfare trial which lasted 9 weeks.
R v TH (2018) (Manchester Crown Court)
Defended at trial TH was charged (along with 10 others) with conspiracy to supply class A drugs.
R v JK (2018) (Leicester Crown Court)
Defended at trial JH was accused of modern slavery and forced labour offences.
Areas of expertise
In addition to his extensive Crown Court practice, Derek has acted for military personnel in a range of offences. Members of the Armed Forces charged with criminal offences may be required to answer to them in Courts Martial either abroad or in the UK. The proceedings are crucially different to their civilian counterparts. These are specialist courts.
Derek has regularly represented members of the services as well as associated persons subject to service law. He has a proven track record of appearing in these courts with considerable success. The following are some of the matters in which he has been instructed.
R v ex L.Cpl. LF (2026)
Instructed to represent at LF Court Martial. LF had been accused of fraud by false representation.
R v Capt. TD (2025)
Instructed to defend TD in Court Martial. TD had been accused of sexual assault x3.
R v IJ (2025)
IJ was a teacher serving in an Armed Forces school in Germany in 1980’s. Multiple historic allegations of sexual assaults in the classrooms emerged from his former pupils. The case was of considerable complexity and demands extensive legal knowledge and courtroom experience. During the proceedings Derek cross examined a very vulnerable complainant who has extensive mental health difficulties (conducted by live link under s28 Children and Young Persons Act) and made detailed written and oral submissions to stay the proceedings in respect of another complainant as an abuse of process.
R v AS1. HT (2025)
Defended HT at Court Martial in Bulford accused of two offences of sexual assault against a female friend whilst she stayed overnight in his bedroom. To be guilty of a sexual assault there must be (1) intentional (2) sexual (3) touching (4) without consent and, crucially, (5) HT did not reasonably believe that the complainant did not consent. This trial revolved around HT’s belief that the complainant was consenting to his contact with her.
R v L.Cpl. JM (2025)
Defended JM at Court Martial in Bulford who, whilst stationed in Kenya, had been accused of rape of a female. They had been on a first date together and engaged in consensual sexual intercourse. She alleged that later that night she woke to discover that JM was having intercourse with her which she neither knew about because she was asleep, nor wanted. JM asserted that she was awake and encouraged him and fully participated.
R v Flt Lt. MR (2025)
Defended MR at Court Martial in Catterick charged with rape and sexual assault following a Mess Dinner. The complainant, whom he had spent the latter part of the evening with, returned with him to his quarters. There was kissing and other sexual behaviour. The complainant said that she did not consent. MR’s defence revolved around issues of consent and his reasonable belief that she consented.
R v Cpl. MN (2024)
Defended MN at Court Martial in Bulford charged with importation of psychoactive drugs from the Netherlands. An order was placed on the web for illicit substances. The police were alerted to the activity, and the parcel was tracked coming into the UK and followed to MNs quarters where he resided with his wife and teenage child. The case involved detailed scrutiny of MNs internet activity (who was using the computer and when); his banking activity (who had access to his bank accounts) and whether there was any evidence to rule out the suggestion that others, including his wife and teenage child, might have placed the orders.
R v Flt Lt. TH (2024)
Defended TH at Court Martial in Bulford charged with sexual assault in a nightclub. TH was celebrating because football team he played in had won a local cup for the first time. The same day he was informed that his wife was pregnant. He consumed a lot of alcohol and before he and his football teammates went to a nightclub. He was happily kissing and grabbing both men and women in his drunken state. He grabbed the bottom of a woman whom he did not know. To be guilty the touching needed to be sexual. In trial he argued that the touching was not sexual, it was intended as a joke – in the same way it had been with everyone else he had encountered in that way that evening.
R v ex-Rfn CS (2024)
Defended CS at Court Martial in Bulford charged with conspiracy to supply a substantial quantity (overall approx. 1kg) of class A drugs to other members of the services over many months. The case involved a considerable volume of phone messages and other such data from which the police sought to argue that CS was at the head of the conspiracy, that he had coerced and directed the other conspirators.
R v AS1. JF (2023)
Defended JF at Court Martial in Catterick for offences of grooming children over the internet. He was alleged to have sent indecent images of himself to children. There were charges of possessing indecent images of children, and possession of extreme images. JFs case was that the prosecution could not prove that he had sent the images, or what was shown in them. It was argued that the prosecution could not prove the ages of the people who the police said had been groomed, it could only be inferred from comments. Lastly that the prosecution could not prove the ages of the naked young women in the pictures, so could not prove the offences.
R v S.Sgt AB (2023)
Instructed for AB at Court Martial in Bulford. AB was one of three SNCOs alleged to have assaulted a subordinate [X]. One of the other SNCOs was alleged to have had knife during the assault. AB was able to argue that he was not involved in any assault, whatever the others had done did not involve him. X was behaving violently towards AB. ABs interactions were reasonable and proportionate and measured against the aggression that X was showing towards AB.
R v Cpl SB (2023)
Advised SB on appeal against conviction for 22 charges containing a mixture of sexual assault offences, disgraceful conduct and indecent conduct offences against multiple female junior soldiers.
R v Capt. AM (2023)
Instructed to represent AM, a captain of 25 years’ service, at Bulford Military Court. AM was charged with an offence of misconduct through alcohol contrary to s20(1) Armed Forces Act 2006. Whilst stationed in Cyprus, it was alleged that whilst drunk AM had engaged in sexually inappropriate behaviour with female Lance Corporals.
R v Tpr. MR (2023)
Defended MR at court martial in Bulford in respect of possession of indecent images of children.
R v S.Sgt KP (2023)
Defended KP in the Summary Appeal Court at Bulford against a conviction of ill treatment to a subordinate.
Maj Gen RAB (2022)
Represented RAB in respect of a Major Administrative Action at a 2-day oral hearing of the Army Board (comprising of Gen P Sanders and Lt Gen Nesmith [Chief and Deputy Chief of the General Staff]) at Army headquarters. RAB was accused whilst in drink of being over familiar with a female civilian delegate at a residential course. It was asserted that he had touched her in places and in a way which was unwelcome and alleged thereby that he failed to maintain standards of conduct expected of someone of his rank.
R v Cpl JD (2022)
Instructed for JD appearing in Court Martial in Catterick. JD was alleged to have assaulted another in barracks.
R v S.Sgt. JH (2022)
Instructed to represent JH at Court Martial (Bulford), Staff Sgt charged with offences of fraud arising from representations that he had made in connection with his Forces Help to Buy Loan and wrongful receipt of allowance of get You home Travel.
R v SAC(T) JDS (2021)
Defended MR at Court Martial in Catterick in respect of possession of indecent images of children.
R v Spr HR (2021)
Instructed to represent HR in Court Martial in Bulford. HR was one of three servicemen alleged to have assaulted senior officers in Austria.
R v AC JP (2020)
Represented JP at court martial in Catterick. JP was one of three aircraftsmen charged with harassment and bullying of another during Phase One training.
R v AC WB-K (2020)
Defended WB-K at trial in Court Martial at Catterick. WB-K and another aircraftsman were jointly charged with the rape of a female in her ground floor room in female accommodation. The prosecution said in the process of raping the female the two men were disturbed by others. WB and his co-defendant asserted that the female had invited them into her room, they came through an open window and all three engaged in consensual sexual intercourse.