Mary Loram QC prosecutes and defends in cases of serious crime, including homicide, fraud and serious sexual offending. Whether instructed for the prosecution or the defence, Mary Loram QC is known for an ability to get to the issues in a case. She is also known for her excellent client care and ability to gain the confidence of lay clients as well as others instructing her. She is noted as “a true jury advocate” who is persuasive as well as tenacious.
She is experienced in the following areas:
Homicide - as well as acting as junior in a number of murder cases, as a junior alone, Mary prosecuted and defended manslaughter and murder cases and is now instructed as leading counsel in cases of murder and attempted murder, as well as gangland-related shootings.
Fraud – Mary Loram QC has appeared in cases of banking fraud, "red diesel" fraud, a pyramid selling scheme, significant fraud by employees and money laundering. She also has experience of representing in cases involving trading standards offences. She understands the eye for details required for such cases and the necessity for deploying that detail in a jury-friendly way.
Human trafficking – even before the introduction of the Modern Slavery Act 2015, Mary Loram QC had become familiar with the difficulties and issues involved in such cases, having prosecuted and defended in cases involving the exploitation of Polish workers in Worcestershire, and the kidnapping of a trafficked victim in Bedfordshire. She has made herself familiar with the new statutory framework, writing articles on the National Referral Mechanism for the benefit of instructing solicitors. She has since been involved in cases revolving around the exploitation of illegal immigrants in drug factories and the trafficking of a sex worker.
Serious sexual offending - Mary has significant experience of defending and prosecuting cases involving children and vulnerable adults. She is well versed in dealing with such cases with the sensitivity that they require, and has dealt with the whole range of such offences, including: the prosecution of a defendant who had raped and seriously abused three generations of women in his own immediate family; the defence of a former foster carer for the abuse of 4 of those in his care; the prosecution of a man in Northampton for the abuse via Skype of young boys in the Phillipines (a case used in a BBC report on this area.)
- Serious Crime
- Serious sexual offending
Appointments & Memberships
- Recorder of the Crown Court (Crime),
- Inner Temple
- Criminal Bar Association
R v Craig Sayers (2019)
Defence of man accused of causing extensive injuries to his partner’s very young child. Partner accused of either causing them or allowing them. Cut-throat defences run by both defendants. Significant evidence from a variety of medical experts.
R v Mark Sinclair (2019)
Defendant had killed his long-term partner by strangulation and stabbing. Defence of diminished responsibility raised as a result of the defendant’s personality disorder. Extensive cross-examination of the defence psychiatrist - defendant convicted of murder unanimously by the jury.
R v Quinn & Sanghera (2019)
Prosecution of two defendants for the murder of a father who was out with his friends – issues of joint enterprise, cell site evidence, hostile witnesses arose. Convictions for murder and manslaughter resulted.
R –v- Hemmings & Hemmings (2018)
Prosecution of two brothers for murder; Roman and Sero Hemmings who were convicted unanimously at Leicester Crown Court after a two week trial that involved the presentation of cell site, CCTV and mobile phone evidence - Click Here
R v LEWIS (2018)
Defence of man accused of the murder of an acquaintance by slashing his throat with a knife; judge commented on the “first class representation” that the defendant had received, even in the face of strong evidence.
R v CARR and 4 others (2018)
Prosecution of Carr for the shooting of deceased in a drug-related dispute and the 4 others defendants for their various roles in the offence Case involved substantial amount of legal argument and a variety of complexities including witnesses avoiding the court, hearsay applications, hostile witnesses, character and significant evidence being discovered during the trial, amongst other issues.
R v MARC FINNIE (2018)
Defence of man accused of murder of deceased, who had been verbally abusing his wife (a co-defendant) – acquitted of murder (had pleaded guilty to manslaughter.)
R v McLACHLAN-SIM (2017)
Prosecution of man for the attempted murder of his girlfriend by throwing her out of a window; large amount of material needed to be absorbed in order to be effectively dealt with;
R v HICKEN & WEST (2017)
Prosecution of the son and daughter-in-law of deceased for preventing a lawful burial after they kept his body upstairs for weeks whilst they claimed his salary; case dependent on inferences to be drawn from a variety of different types of evidence (cell site, banking evidence, CCTV etc.)
R v FORD (2017)
Prosecution of man with mental health problems for the murder of his wife; case required skeleton arguments about the ambit of the “fitness to plead” doctrine.
R v HUSSEY (2017)
Prosecution of employee for fraud against her employers which spanned a number of years and involved a complex use of bank accounts. A vast amount of material needed to be made comprehensible to the jury.
R v PERKINS (and other related cases) (2017)
Prosecution of a series of trials arising out of an investigation into sexual offending within The Jesus Army in the 1980s and 1990s
R v CRANE (2016)
Defence of woman in her 60s who, with a number of others, was accused of involvement in a “pyramid selling scheme”;
R v FORD (2015)
Prosecution of defendant who had sexually abused young boys in the Philippines via Skype – involved issues of jurisdiction (later featured in BBC report on the abuse of children abroad by English offenders);
R v SHARMAN (2015)
Defence of a former foster carer, now in his 70s, in relation to allegations of the serious sexual abuse of 4 of his former wards in the 1980s; trial judge specifically commented on the skilful yet sensitive cross-examination of the complainants.
Education and Qualifications