R v X – Northampton Crown Court 2025
Murder committed by a 13-year-old
Samuel Skinner KC instructed by East Midlands CPS to prosecute a 13-year-old girl for the murder of an adult.
R v Y – 2025
Causing death and serious injury by dangerous driving – defendant a senior police officer
Samuel Skinner KC, leading Sarah Knight of 36 Crime, instructed to advise the IOPC and then prosecute a senior police officer for causing death, and serious injury, by dangerous driving whilst on duty.
R v X, Y, Z, and A – Nottingham Crown Court 2025
Gang rape of a 15 year old committed by other teenagers
Samuel Skinner KC instructed to advise the CPS and then prosecute 4 teenagers for the gang rape of a young person in a dark street of a market town.
R v Linden – Northampton Crown Court 2025
Rape and controlling and coercive behaviour
Samuel Skinner KC advised and represented the Crown in this complicated rape case involving consensual strangulation during intercourse.
R v Whyles – Northampton Crown Court 2025
Rape of a vulnerable child
Defendant raped, sexually assaulted, and abused a vulnerable child whilst providing her with respite care. Complainant is disabled and is unable to speak or write but tapped out words using a head activated communication device. Advice given on correct charges, the conduct of the ABE and use of experts. Defendant sentenced to 24 years.
R v Newman – Derby Crown Court 2024
Murder and GBH
The defendant, in revenge, drove a 3-tonne van into a crowd of people during a Christmas night out in Ilkeston. He killed one man and injured two others. Sentenced to life, with his appeal against sentence dismissed by the Court of Appeal.
X Company Ltd – 2024
Artificial Intelligence Advice
Samuel has been advising a multi-national company, and a Russell Group University, about the use of AI to gather evidence through body worn video footage.
Director of Public Prosecutions v Price and Another [2024] EWHC 2864 (Admin) – Birmingham High Court
Case stated appeal
Appeal where the High Court considered the proper construction of the offence of assaulting an emergency worker acting in the execution of their functions.
Operation Nutmeg – Leicester Crown Court 2024
Organised crime
Six defendants accused of conspiracies to supply kilos of Class A drugs in Leicester, along with associated money laundering. Samuel Skinner presented complicated telephone evidence showing connections between defendants, along with cell-site maps and ANPR evidence to prove their locations at important times. He also presented evidence from undercover police surveillance officers, and called a forensic scientist to present complex DNA evidence. He also made a successful witness anonymity application. He resisted several submissions at the close of the Crown’s case, then cross examined the 3 defendants who chose to give evidence. There were 5 convictions resulting in long sentences.
R v Sarwar and others Manchester Crown Court 2022-2026
Frauds – insolvency offences
Samuel Skinner, leading Arthur Kendrick of 36 Crime, prosecutes the largest case of fraud in the Insolvency Service’s history. Trial 2026.
R v Ajaz – Northampton Crown Court 2024
Allegations of sexual offences committed by a GP against female patients
Defendant GP was alleged to have indecently assaulted female patients and conducted unnecessary intimate examinations of them in his consulting room over the course of many decades. Defendant found to be unfit to plead and proceedings then concluded owing to his death. Samuel led Preetika Mathur of 36 Crime and succeeded in a contested application for a witness summons for the defendant’s former colleagues to deliver up their folder of complaints about him. Samuel also dealt with a complicated hearsay notice, resisted a s.8 application for further disclosure of the victims’ private medical notes, and dealt with complex legal arguments on fitness to plead and abuse of process. Samuel also drafted 2 sets of representations to the Attorney General resisting an application for a nolle prosequi.
R v Scampion – Lincoln Crown Court 2024
Allegations of sexual offences against a vulnerable disabled child
Samuel advised on correct charges and proper conduct of ABE video interviews where the defendant was alleged to have committed sexual offences against a deaf and non-speaking vulnerable child.
R v Hutchinson – Derby Crown Court 2024
Attempted murder by strangulation
A complex case of attempted murder alleged to have been committed by the defendant against his own father.
R v Brown – Snaresbrook Crown Court 2024
VAT fraud – ‘The Secret Defendant’
Samuel Skinner successfully defended Twitter/X’s ‘The Secret Defendant’ during her prosecution by HMRC for fraud offences. Samuel applied to the Court to end the very long running case against the defendant as an abuse of process. The prosecution accepted his arguments and dropped the case after 4 years of litigation.
Operation Oakridge – Derby Crown Court 2024
Organised crime, attempted murder, firearms – international kabaddi tournament
Samuel Skinner, leading Claire Fraser of 36 Crime, prosecuted 11 defendants at Derby Crown Court alleging attempted murder during organised violence at an international kabaddi fixture in Derby. What should have been a fun family day out at a sporting event descended into a huge violent disorder which left multiple people seriously injured and many people in fear for their safety after firearms were discharged in broad daylight. The defendants received heavy sentences.
Curgenven v Chief Constable of Guernsey – Guernsey Royal Court 2024
Action against the police, charging standards for criminal offences
Samuel Skinner advised the Guernsey police and drafted pleadings in a series of civil applications being brought by a claimant criticising police behaviour in a domestic violence case.
Operation Transpire – Nottingham Crown Court 2024
Organised crime, attempted murder
Samuel Skinner, leading Tom Parker of 36 Crime, prosecuted a 6 defendant case alleging attempted murder and related offences by a gang of masked knifemen who burst into the home of a teenager and stabbed him in the neck in front of his mum. There were life changing injuries suffered by the victim, who suffered from massive blood loss and a subsequent stroke. All the defendants were convicted.
R v Mills – Leicester Crown Court 2023
Murder by stabbing in the street
Samuel Skinner led Matthew Rowcliffe of 36 Crime. This was a stabbing on a Leicester street, late at night, witnessed by several children whom Samuel called to give evidence for the Crown. He also presented complicated expert evidence from a forensic pathologist about the cause of death because the defendant had broken the knife during the attack and left part of the blade inside his victim. The jury convicted the defendant of murder and he was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years.
R v Davidson – Derby Crown Court 2024
Child sexual abuse
Samuel Skinner leading Matthew Rowcliffe of 36 Crime, prosecuted the defendant’s campaign of rapes against 6 very young victims, taking place over many years. In this case there were challenging factual and legal issues as crimes crossed decades and changing legislation. Samuel was instructed pre-charge and took the case all the way through to its conclusion when the defendant pleaded guilty to the 30 crimes Samuel had identified. When sentencing the defendant to 25 years in custody, the experienced judge said that it was the worst case of its kind that he had seen.
R v Pipe [2023] EWCA Crim 328, CA – Court of Appeal after trial at Nottingham Crown Court
1960s sexual abuse in an approved school
Samuel prosecuted Nigel Pipe, a former housemaster at Skegby Hall in Nottinghamshire, for offences of historical sexual abuse against boys under his care at an Approved School. The Court of Appeal had to consider the proper basis for staying historical sexual indictments as an abuse of process. The defendant had died by the time his appeal against conviction was called on, and it was pursued by his widow. The appeal was dismissed.
X v Disclosure and Barring Service – Upper Tribunal 2023
Public law – An appeal to the Upper Tribunal (Administrative Appeals Chamber) under the Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Act 2006
Samuel acted on behalf of a teacher whom the DBS had barred from working with adults and children based on unproven allegations that she had hit her pupils. Samuel drafted grounds of appeal, using human rights principles, and said that the DBS had made serious errors of law. Having read Samuel’s grounds of appeal, the DBS conceded the case and the teacher returned to work.
R v Shah [2023] EWCA Crim 192 – Court of Appeal 2023
Appeal against conviction – sex offences committed by a doctor
A doctor appealed against his conviction for sexual offences on vulnerable patients. The Court of Appeal had to consider when a solicitor’s work for a defendant fell into negligence such that it had an impact upon the safety of a conviction.
R v Cummins Derby Crown Court 2023
Attempted murder – domestic violence stabbing
Samuel prosecuted a domestic violence attempted murder. The defendant and his victim lived together with their 10 year old child. The defendant got drunk one day and when he returned home late at night he argued with his victim and chased her upstairs. He then stabbed her, 18 times. He was so angry he broke the blade of the knife and left it inside his victim’s back. He left his victim on the bedroom floor, confessed to the 10 year old who had listened to the attack from the upstairs landing, and ran out of the house. It took the child nearly 6 months to be ready to make a statement against his father, who was later sentenced to 22 years.
R v X – Lincoln Crown Court 2022
£2m confiscation order made against a teenager
Samuel Skinner obtained a confiscation order against a teenaged cybercriminal who had amassed £2M of Bitcoin.
Operation Tinge – Nottingham Crown Court 2022
Organised crime – the Portland Tiara heist
Samuel prosecuted a 3-month, 11 defendant trial. The case involved the burglary of the Harley Gallery in Nottinghamshire by criminals who stole the nationally significant, multimillion pound, Portland Tiara, before spiriting it to a jewellers in London’s Hatton Garden. It was then smuggled abroad. The gang also robbed and burgled wealthy families across the UK, including the footballers Ashley Cole and Tom Huddlestone. Samuel presented eyewitness evidence, along with complex cell-site and ANPR mapping data and DNA. He made 5 bad character applications, and successfully resisted an application to discharge the jury. The result was 6 convictions (all the lead defendants).
R v McDowall – Nottingham Crown Court 2022
Alleged rape by a police officer
Samuel prosecuted a policeman for alleged rape. The defendant said the complainant had consented to sexual activity. The Crown alleged that the complainant was too drunk to have consented. Samuel helped the reluctant complainant to present her evidence clearly to the jury and successfully resisted a last minute defence application to tell the jury about her previous sexual history.
R v Harjinder Singh Kooner [2020] EWCA Crim 1059 – Court of Appeal 2021 following proceedings at Northampton Crown Court
Fraud – appeal against sentence
Appeal against sentence, successfully resisted by Samuel Skinner, requiring the Court of Appeal to consider whether a guilty plea was entered unequivocally.
R v Warner – Warwick Crown Court 2021
Murder – acquittal at the close of the prosecution’s evidence
Defendant alleged to have stabbed the victim to death and hidden his body. The murder case against Samuel Skinner’s client was dismissed by the judge at the close of the prosecution’s evidence and he was found not guilty.
Serious Fraud Office v ENRC – 2020
Bribery and corruption investigation
Samuel was instructed by the Serious Fraud Office, in relation to an investigation into a multi-billion dollar bribery and corruption investigation involving ENRC a FTSE100 listed corporation.
Serious Fraud Office v X – 2020
Bribery and corruption
Samuel Skinner was instructed by the Serious Fraud Office as part of a joint UK-Dutch investigation into a private bank.
R v Hafeez [2020] EWCA Crim 453 – Leeds Crown Court and Court of Appeal
Terrorism – Autistic Spectrum Disorder Defence
Samuel Skinner defended in a terrorism trial at Leeds where the defendant was alleged to have the largest collection of s.58 terrorist material ever collected in the UK. The trial judge accepted the defence argument that autistic spectrum disorder is capable in law of contributing to a defence of ‘reasonable excuse’ under the Terrorism Act 2000. Samuel then successfully resisted the Attorney General’s unduly lenient sentence reference at the Court of Appeal.
R v Shuleko, Smikle, and Carmody Birmingham Crown Court 2020
Murder – shooting
Shuleko and Smikle were jailed for a minimum of 32 years after shooting dead a father-of-two following a dispute over £40 he was owed for drugs. Carmody received 6 and a half years for assisting the killers.
R v Adam – Lincoln Crown Court 2018
Murder – stabbing
A killing which arose out of an argument in Skegness on a bank holiday weekend.
Carney v North Lincolnshire Council [2016] EWHC 676(Admin) – Administrative Court London 2016
Public law – ASBO
Appeal by Case Stated against an anti-social behaviour order imposed on a political campaigner based in Lincolnshire where the High Court had to consider the proper application of Article 10 ECHR to ASBOs.
Babbage (R on the application of) v Secretary of State For The Home Department [2016] EWHC 148 (Admin), QBD
Public law – judicial review
Samuel appeared for the Home Office at this judicial review of a removal decision against a Zimbabwean national.
Rochdale Metropolitan Borough Council v KW [2015] EWCOP 13 – Ct of Protection Leeds 2015
Public law – Court of Protection – DOLS
Samuel appeared for the local authority when Mostyn J set out his disagreement with the Court of Appeal’s consideration of Article 5 ECHR with respect to DOLS.
R (on the application of Wasif) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (rule 34 – “print and send”) IRJ [2015] UKUT 0270 (IAC) – Manchester 2015
Public law- judicial review
In this judicial review, the President of the Upper Tribunal described the case as a ‘classic legality judicial review challenge’ and agreed with Samuel’s submissions on the proper construction of the Immigration Rules.
R (on the application of Mahmood) v Secretary of State for the Home Department (effective service – 2000 Order) IJR [2016] UKUT 00057 (IAC) – Birmingham 2015
Public law – Judicial review
A judicial review where the Upper Tribunal agreed with Samuel Skinner’s contention that the claim should be dealt with on Wednesbury irrationality basis and not precedent fact.
Goode (R on the application of ) v Nottingham Crown Court [2013] EWHC 1726 (Admin) – Administrative Court London
Public law – search warrants
Judicial review into the validity of a search warrant issued by Nottingham Crown Court against a legal executive and his employer. Still a leading case in this area of law.
R v Caley and others [2012] EWCA Crim 2821 – Court of Appeal 2012
Appeal against sentence
Leading authority on the credit available to a defendant who pleads guilty.
R v Collis [2012] EWCA Crim 1335 Court of Appeal 2012
Appeal against sentence
Appeal against sentence owing to the failure properly to apply the relevant sentencing guideline.
R v Liaudanskis (Vitalijus) [2012] EWCA Crim 1747 – Court of Appeal 2012
Appeal against sentence
Appeal against sentence owing to no discount having been given for a guilty plea.
R v Thirkwell (Frederick Thomas) [2011] EWCA Crim 2759 – Court of Appeal 2011
Appeal against sentence
Appeal against sentence, heard by the Lord Chief Justice of England and Wales. Appeal allowed.
R v Middleton (Andrew) [2011] EWCA Crim 2511 – Court of Appeal 2011
Appeal against conviction where the Court considered the proper basis for admitting bad character to rebut the possibility of coincidence under s.101(1)(d) CJA 2003 rather than to establish a propensity. Application for re-trial allowed.
Gonzales (R on the application of) v Folkestone Magistrates Court [2010] EWHC 3428 (Admin) – Administrative Court London 2010
Public law – Judicial review – mixed statements
This was Samuel’s first judicial review case, which he settled and argued before the High Court whilst a pupil. The Court had to decide upon the proper construction of a defendant’s statement – whether self-serving or mixed. The Court also described it as a paradigm case for the discussion of the imposition of a restraining order on acquittal. Claim for judicial review allowed and conviction quashed.
