John Hurlock
- Association of Football Agents
- Criminal Bar Association
- Fraud Lawyers Association
- LLB Hons
- Direct Access Qualified
Instructing John Hurlock
To instruct John or for any further information please contact our clerks on +44 (0)20 7440 8888 or clerks@2br.co.uk.
John Hurlock has a broad advisory practice, with a particular focus on financial crime (with extensive experience in complex civil, criminal, and regulatory financial crime matters) and sports law (with a particular emphasis of disciplinary and regulatory matters).
Practice Areas
Financial Crime advisory work
John gives expert analysis, investigative insight, and litigation support in cases relating to corporate fraud, money laundering, asset tracing, bribery and corruption.
Known for delivering clear, impartial advice that meets the highest standards, John is regularly instructed to assist with expert witness reports, forensic reviews of financial data, and strategic advice in high-value and high-profile cases. He also offers guidance on disclosure, trial preparation, and cross-border financial crime issues, and works closely with legal teams to build and present robust cases.
Recent examples of John’s advisory work in this area include:
– Water rights fraud prosecuted by the Financial Conduct Authority at Southwark Crown Court.
– Pre-charge advice on a £39 million pound VAT diversion fraud conspiracy
– Pre-charge advice on a Covid loan fraud and breach of insolvency regulations
– Pre-charge advice on an allegation of Post Office fraud
– Advising on appeal against conviction and on POCA proceedings in a £100 million VAT fraud
Sports advisory work
Due to John’s experience as a footballer and registered football agent he is regularly instructed to advise and represent managers and premier league football players facing disciplinary proceedings and in cases involving breach of contract.
John has a wealth of experience in the sector and examples of recent instructions include:
– Advising on the contract agreement of a premier league footballer. John also advised on the image rights relating to the use and exploitation of the clients’ image by way of promotional branding advertising, marketing, media, sponsorship endorsement and other commercial activities and advising on the terms of an NDA for all such partners.
– Advising on football league Managers breach of FA rules and sentence
– Advising on Football league managers contract termination, breach of contract arbitration and settlement
– Advised on the tax implications for the agent of a premiership footballer moving jurisdictions
Notable advisory cases
R v H
Successfully advised and represented the defendant through criminal allegations, civil restraint and HM Revenue and Customs’ investigation.
Due to John Hurlock’s experience as a footballer and registered FA football agent he is instructed to represent clients in football related matters. In his school days John played for Manchester United’s academy. Since then, John has played professionally for Stockport County and semi-professionally in over 600 appearances for: Altringham, Nuneaton, Bedworth, Harrow, and Chesham United as a central midfielder.
Due to this experience, John is instructed to represent managers and premier league football players facing disciplinary proceedings and breach of contract. Recently, John has represented a football manager for breaking FA Rule E3.1 and another football manager for breach of contract arising out of financial settlements following dismissal and negotiating new contract terms. Additionally, John has advised on the tax implications for the agent of a premiership footballer moving jurisdictions.
Other regulatory matters that John has dealt with recently includes:
Greater Manchester Police v X, Thameside Magistrates Court [2025]
John was instructed privately by X via the direct access scheme. X is a high-profile individual, who faced charges relating to the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 application for Forfeiture relating to the sale of counterfeit designer items. Following an investigation by trading standards, Greater Manchester Police seized £27,000 of jewellery from X, including sentimental items. John made written representations to Greater Manchester Police in relation to the items seized and the police withdrew their case. As a result, X received the £27,000 worth of items back from the police.
Guildford Borough Council v PG and LK, Guildford Crown Court [2025]
John Hurlock was instructed privately via the direct access scheme to represent both PG and LK in their sentence (having not been instructed at trial) for carrying out a licensable activity as specified in Schedule 1, Part 5, Paragraph 8, of the Animal Welfare (Licensing of Activities Involving Animals) (England) Regulations 2018, namely running a large-scale unlicenced puppy farm breeding and selling hundreds of puppies (with a turnover of over £100,000). John not only persuaded the Court to impose a suspended sentence, but also persuaded the Court not to impose a fine or the disqualification order in respect of dogs (under s.34 Animal Welfare Act 2006) that the prosecution applied for. John also persuaded the prosecution not to apply for confiscation.
R v ZM, Guildford Crown Court [2024]
John Hurlock was instructed privately via the direct access scheme to represent ZM who was appealing the decision to have his gun licence revoked. The prosecution had revoked ZM’s licence following concern raised from his spouse and a historic medical referral for depression. John made a hearsay application directly challenging the evidence of ZM’s spouse and served a legal argument triggering the prosecution to review the case against ZM.
Notable fraud cases
R v JL
John Hurlock secured the unanimous acquittal of a former international and Premier League footballer for money laundering offences at Norwich Crown Court. JL faced trial for possessing cash and using his bank accounts to transfer substantial sums of money which the prosecution alleged to be the proceeds of crime. Although JL did accept that he had sold nitrous oxide (and pleaded guilty to a separate charge relating to this), John highlighted the police’s lack of proper investigation into the alleged unexplained third-party debits and was able to demonstrate (from defence evidence and an analysis of the Police’s download of JL’s mobile phone) that over half of the allegedly criminal monies could be shown to come from innocent transactions.
R v ID, Reading Crown Court [2025]
ID was charged with 39 offences involving fraudulent trading, making articles for use in fraud, and fraud (with an estimated value of loss to investors of over £3 million). From 2019 to 2021, ID persuaded people to invest in his business, telling investors that he was working with reputable companies such as Unilever and Spinneys (providing fake e-mails, bank statements and brochures to maintain the illusion of a legitimate business). The money ID received from investments were instantly moved to his personal bank accounts to fund his gambling addiction. John was able to persuade the prosecution to agree to ID being sentenced on the basis of the loss figure being only £1 million. This avoided a Newton Hearing, which proved to be beneficial as ID retained credit from the judge for his guilty plea.
R v JA, Southwark Crown Court [2024]
John Hurlock represented JA at her trial at Southwark Crown Court where she was charged with money laundering offences. The prosecution alleged that JA had laundered over £300,000 which derived from her husband’s international, multi-kilo drug enterprise. John reduced the prosecution’s figure on the amount that JA had laundered by showing independent evidence that her husband sold PPE during the indictment period. This coupled with strong mitigation resulted in JA receiving a suspended sentence.
R v AG, Southwark Crown Court [2023]
John Hurlock led Sam Thomas defending AG, who was charged with Contravention of a Relevant Requirement (relating to failing to register his money service business), Helping an Asylum Seeker to Enter the UK, Assisting Unlawful Immigration to the United Kingdom, and money laundering. The prosecution relied on an ITV documentary on people smuggling to the UK in which migrants can be heard referring to a “Mr G” who could help them on their arrival to the UK. The Crown attributed the “Mr G” in the documentary to AG. The case also involved extensive probe material from inside of AG’s office.
R v N, Harrow Crown Court [2023]
John Hurlock represented N in his trial at Harrow Crown Court sitting at St Albans which resulted in a unanimous acquittal. N was a bitcoin trader alleged to be part of a multi-million-pound money laundering conspiracy (the prosecution’s case was that N was involved in a conspiracy to launder money from criminal organisations, using an Iranian money service bureau and converting that money into bitcoin crypto currency). Through careful cross-examination of money laundering experts and N’s co-defendant, and analysis of N’s bitcoin wallets, phone data, and research into the Iranian money service bureau’s public image, John was able to demonstrate that N’s practices in running his crypto currency business were legitimate. The co-defendant’s involved in the running of the Iranian money service bureau were all later found guilty of money laundering offences.
R v Z & Others
Z was the head of a gang responsible for Britain’s largest ever credit card fraud at the time, totalling £17 million. The fraud was cross jurisdictional with officers investigating in Poland, Estonia, Russia, America, and the Virgin Islands. There was a total of 32,000 credit card numbers involved in the fraud. Z received a sentence of 5 and a half years following a guilty plea to conspiracy to steal.
Notable confiscation cases
R v S & V
Acted for both defendants in large scale drug importation / supply operation. Successfully defended both defendants re allegations of hidden assets and the confiscation of their assets here and abroad.
R v Z & Others
17 million pound fraud plot Britain’s biggest ever credit card fraud.
R v J & Others
Successfully argued that J did not have hidden assets abroad and successfully excluded various assets from the confiscation order.
R v X, Inner London Crown Court [2023]
X was the head of a Brazilian OCG (organised crime group) supplying Class A, B, and C drugs throughout London on an industrial scale. The case included a rental containing over 2.5 million pounds worth of drugs. The case against X included surveillance, phone evidence, and financial transactions. X was charged with conspiracy to supply class A, B, C and acquiring criminal property (namely, cash). A multi-million-pound confiscation then followed with X having properties in the UK and abroad alongside luxury cars and £900,000 in his personal bank account. After a contested confiscation hearing and legal argument no money or assets were taken from X.
R v SL, Maidstone Crown Court
The Crown sought confiscation proceedings against SL and asserted a benefit figure of more than £22 million with identifiable realisable assets of just short of £1 million. It was also claimed that SL had hidden assets so that the full amount of £22 million should be deemed payable. Experts were instructed and key pieces of evidence challenged including the valuation of drugs, analysis of phone material and handwriting comparisons. The final orders made were a benefit figure of just under £2 million with a realisable amount of £450,000.
John regularly appears in the Crown Court representing defendants for a range of drug offences from Possession with Intent to Supply to Encro Chat (Operation Venetic) cases. John has advised defendants in Dubai who are facing criminal charges in the UK and Europe, often relating to Encro Chat (Operation Venetic) and Sky ECC material. In these matters John has advised on issues surrounding extradition to other jurisdictions and the strength of the prosecution case.
John is often instructed early on in proceedings concerning victims of modern slavery due to his understanding of the law in this area. Some of John’s recent cases regarding modern slavery include: representing a Vietnamese male who had been trafficked to the UK by loan sharks to work in a cannabis factory situated within railway arches. The trial was heard soon after the rulings in R v Brecani and R v ADD and the case was stayed as an abuse of process following legal argument surrounding the Police’s responsibilities in investigating allegations of modern slavery, particularly after receiving positive / conclusive grounds decisions from the NRM authority.
John is also experienced in dealing with young victims of modern slavery such as a young and vulnerable girl he represented who was charged with Possession with Intent to Supply. The prosecution offered no evidence following service of a detailed defence case statement and instruction of the appropriate experts in the case. The girl was later prosecuted for another drugs supply offence and John served another detailed defence case statement and expert reports which resulted in the prosecution offering no evidence again.
Notable drugs cases
R v EF, Harrow Crown Court sitting at Southwark [2025] EF
EF, a young girl of good character, was acquitted unanimously after being charged with supplying class A and B drugs and possession of criminal property after being found in possession of 60 wraps of class A drugs on her person, with over £105,000 worth of drugs and £7,600 cash found at her address. The prosecution disputed her defence of duress and modern slavery, relying on messages found on her device whereby she appeared compliant and “friendly”. At trial, John adduced EF’s previous reports of abuse to the police and served a defence bundle showing images of injuries EF had sustained that were found on her mobile phone download provided by the police. A leading expert in Modern Slavery, Bernard Gravett, was called by the defence and gave evidence to the jury about the reality of modern slavery, grooming, and the exploitation of women within drug gangs. Psychological expert evidence was also obtained highlighting how EF’s diagnoses of ADHD, ADD, and autism made her susceptible to exploitation by these gangs.
R v LM, Basildon Crown Court [2025]
John represented LM at his trial at Basildon Crown Court in 2024 and the retrial in 2025. The case was part of Operation Urantic led by the National Crime Agency and concerned the supply of kilo blocks of cocaine within the Essex area between 2021-2023. Following legal argument John excluded EncroChat evidence purported to be discussing LM and his involvement in drug supply. During both trials extensive legal argument took place regarding disclosure of sensitive information which resulted in favourable agreed facts being made for the defence.
R v DB, Kingston Crown Court [2024]
John secured the unanimous acquittal of DB, charged with being concerned in the supply of MDMA, cocaine and magic mushrooms, following a trial at Kingston Crown Court. DB was a builder who had an assortment of ‘party drugs’ found in his bedroom and a drugs phone found in the kitchen. The phone contained thousands of messages showing the wholesale supply of large quantities of class A drugs. The defence raised at trial was that some of the drugs were DB’s for his own personal use, and that the other drugs and the phone had been left at his address by his drug supplier without his knowledge. The prosecution’s case included cell site material showing co-location between DB and the drug line at material times, explicit messages discussing the sale of drugs, and the finding of a substantial number of drugs within DB’s bedroom.
R v JG, Wood Green Crown Court [2023]
John Hurlock represented JG an 8-month long trial at Wood Green Crown Court into a multi-kilo class A and B drug dealing conspiracy in the North-West London area. The case involved huge quantities of disputed phone evidence (the accuracy of the data was challenged through a defence phone expert) and a “cut-throat” defence with a co-defendant, with JG asserting that he was placed under by his co-defendant and asserting that he was a victim of modern slavery. Although eventually convicted, John persuaded the Court to sentence JG on the basis of a significantly lower role within the conspiracy than alleged by the prosecution. The sentence was referenced (appealed) to the Court of Appeal by the Attorney-General as being unduly lenient. John successfully persuaded the Court of Appeal not to increase the sentence.
R v B, Bristol Crown Court [2019]
B, a former rapper, was charged with Conspiracy to Supply Class A relating to the supply of over £200,000 worth of cocaine. The prosecution case consisted of phone contact with co-defendants, CCTV analysis, and financial enquiries. John represented B during his trial whereby evidence was adduced relating to his rap career and his relationship with a member of the band Little Mix. B was unanimously acquitted.
R v M & Others
The prosecution alleged that M was involved in a large-scale conspiracy to supply Class A drugs. The case involved legal arguments consisting of an: abuse of process, recusal of Judges, disclosure and Section 8 CPIA applications. The case against M was dropped following successful legal argument and the indictment was stayed being as an abuse of process.
R v A & Others
The case involved a large-scale drug operation in the London and Leeds areas involving the supply of class A and B drugs. The allegation was that the defendant was part of an OCG (Organised Crime Group) responsible for the supply of class A drugs between the London and Leeds areas. The evidence against the defendant was observation evidence, association and cell site evidence. The defence case was that the defendant had been set up by a registered police informant who had entrapped the defendant into involving him into the offence. Application was made to exclude the totality of the evidence as against the defendant or to stay the prosecution as an abuse of process of the court. The case involved a detailed defence case statement and various requests for disclosure under section 8 of the CPIA. Due to the complexity of the disclosure issues “Special Counsel” were instructed by the court to protect the interests of the defendants during Ex parte Public Interest Immunity Applications made by the Crown. After two weeks of Public Immunity Applications made by the Crown, they offered no evidence against all defendants.
R v MN
Represented one of 7 defendants in a drugs conspiracy involving importation of over a 100 kilos of class A and B drugs into the North London area. The case involved probe material in a car, a local pub, and a local café. After mitigation was advanced on his behalf MN received a sentence of 12-years’ imprisonment.
R v F & Others
Large scale drug operation involving over 200 hours of probe material from undercover police officers. F’s case was that he was acting under duress by an undercover police informant who involved him in the enterprise. F was found not guilty for these offences.
R v SD
The client was alleged to have cuckooed the address of a young man, which he and his co-accused were said to have then used to sell class A drugs from. The client was also alleged to have blackmailed the victim into giving him money, used a machete to threaten the victim into selling class A drugs, and threatened to kill the victim after he had been arrested for these offences.
R v C
Large scale Drug supply / importation conspiracy of both class A and B drugs. The case involved confiscation proceedings, money laundering and extradition. The main witness in the case was an accountant who kept the books of various drug organisations and who later turned supergrass.
R v G
G was a career criminal who created a drug gang whilst remanded in custody. The case was highly publicised due to its striking similarities to the TV show ‘Breaking Bad’. When released from prison a listening device was placed in G’ car, this provided the bulk of the prosecution’s evidence. John argued the accuracy issues regarding the precision of the listening device, G’s case being that the prosecution was turning it off and on to in an attempt to exclude innocent conversations.
R v R & Others
Conspiracy to supply class A drugs and conspiracy to manufacture crystal meth, amphetamine and ecstasy. The case involved submissions on Abuse of process, an analysis of the workings of probe devices, the admissibility of probe evidence and dementia as a defence. The case was likened to the American TV series “Breaking Bad”.
R v N & Others
Large scale drug supply of class A drugs from a prison.
R v M & Others
Large scale drug supply conspiracy of class A drugs. The case involved Abuse of process, recusal of Judges, disclosure and Section 8 CPIA applications. The indictment was eventually stayed as an abuse of process.
R v R & Others
Large scale multi -handed drugs case involving the supply of class A and B drugs in the West Country. The case involved a supergrass who gave evidence for the crown against all defendants. He was successfully cross-examined to such an extent that the crown no longer relied upon him as a witness of truth. Verdict of Not guilty.
R v J & Others
Conspiracy to supply drugs, confiscation and Money laundering. The case involved an application to change the defendant’s plea from guilty to Not Guilty, and an application for the recusal of a Judge due to perceived bias.
R v C
Large scale Drug supply / importation conspiracy, of both class A and B Drugs. The case involved Confiscation, Money Laundering and Extradition. The main witness in the case was an accountant who kept the books of various drug organisations and who later turned supergrass.
R v K & Others
Multi handed large scale drug operation in the midlands area involving the supply of class A and B drugs. Not guilty.
R v O & Others
The case involved the supply of class B drugs in the midlands area and Mortgage Fraud.
R v F & Others
Large scale drug operation involving over 200 hours of probe material from undercover police officers. The defendant’s case was that he was acting under duress by an undercover police informant who involved him in the enterprise. Not guilty.
R v A & Others
The case involved a large scale drug operation in the London and Leeds areas involving the supply of class A and B drugs. The allegation was that the defendant was part of an OCG (Organised Crime Group) responsible for the supply of class A drugs between the London and Leeds areas. The evidence against the defendant was observation evidence, association and cell site evidence. The defence case was that the defendant had been set up by a registered police informant who had entrapped the defendant into involving him into the offence. Application was made to either exclude the totality of the evidence as against the defendant or to stay the prosecution as an abuse of process of the court. The case involved a detailed defence case statement and various requests for disclosure under section 8 of the CPIA. Due to the complexity of the disclosure issues “Special Counsel” were instructed by the court to protect the interests of the defendants during Ex parte Public Interest Immunity Applications made by the Crown. After two weeks of Public Immunity Applications made by the Crown, the Crown offered no evidence against all defendants and the defendant was found not guilty.
R v N
A Conspiracy involving the supply of class A and B drugs. The case involved a large scale drug operation involving the importation of drugs from Europe via various legitimate companies importing items into the jurisdiction.
R v M
Represented one of 7 defendants in a huge drugs conspiracy involving importation of over a 100 kilos of class A and B Drugs into the North London area. The case once again involved probe material in a car, a local pub and a local café. After mitigation was advanced on his behalf the defendant received a sentence of 12 years imprisonment.
Notable crime cases
R v S & Others
Successfully defended one of six men accused of a conspiracy to blackmail at Newcastle Crown Court. In a trial lasting 6 weeks, it was alleged that the six men had operated together to blackmail a large number of small businesses across England. The method was to carry out work and then demand in some cases 100 times the quoted price, followed by threats of violence to the families of victims when payments were refused. The 4 other defendants were convicted.
R v C & Others
The defendant was charged with conspiring to supply firearms and ammunition. The defendant was said to have been the head of an organisation which supplied firearms and ammunition to the criminal underworld. The police operation lasted over 16 months. It involved video and human surveillance and probes recording all conversations in his address. Defendant was acquitted on both counts.
R v H
A terrorist case where the allegation was that the defendant was involved in collecting monies from various jurisdictions to finance a terrorist organisation. The defence denied support of the organisation and stated that the monies were collected to illegally bring people into the country. Not Guilty.
R v Acourt & Norris
The defendant, one of the men accused of murdering Stephen Lawrence, was charged with racial harassment after throwing a cup of cola at an off-duty black policeman and calling him a “nigger”.
R v S & Others
Allegation of Conspiracy to Rob various addresses and building societies. The case involved abuse of process, exclusion of identification evidence due to breaches of the Codes of Practice and analysis of cell site material. Not Guilty.
R v P & Others
Allegation of Violent disorder. Large scale football violence between Tottenham Hotspur and West Ham fans at White Hart lane. The allegation was that both sets of fans were professional football hooligans who frequently met to fight. The defence was that P was a legitimate West Ham fan who had been ambushed at the train station by Spurs fans, in self defence he and others had chased their aggressors in to the Cockerel pub and kept them there until the authorities arrived. Not guilty of violent disorder.
R v M & Others
Allegation of Violent disorder, large scale unrest at Mile End between Tottenham Hotspur and West Ham fans. The defendant was a Spurs fan. Successfully appealed banning orders imposed by the court at first instance.
R v M
Allegation of gang Rape and Assault, by throwing acid on the victim after she had been raped. Successfully opposed Attorney General reference to increase the defendant’s sentence of six years.
R v X, Leicester Crown Court
John secured a suspended sentence for ‘X’, a former professional footballer turned businessman, in a committal for sentence at Leicester Crown Court for offences of strangulation, stalking, and threatening criminal damage against a former partner. John had not represented the male at his trial, but facing the potential of 2 years 6 months imprisonment for these offences, X instructed John via the Direct Access Scheme to represent him at his sentence.
R v Y, Highbury Magistrate’s Court [2024]
John Hurlock successfully defended Y, a football fan, who faced a football banning order after having pleaded guilty to assault by beating of an emergency worker outside a London football stadium. Following his plea, the prosecution applied to ban him from football matches. John persuaded the court that it would be unjust in all the circumstances to impose the banning order given Y’s personal circumstances and the fact that whilst the assault may have happened on football grounds it was not related to football hooliganism.
R v DA, St Albans Magistrate’s Court [2024]
John Hurlock represented DA, a businessman, charged with obstructing / resisting a police constable, assault with intent to resist arrest, and assaulting an emergency worker. If convicted the male would have lost his job. At trial John cross examined the officer on the body worn footage of the incident to the extent that a successful submission of no case to answer followed. DA was found not guilty and was able to maintain his professional career and uphold his reputation.
R v O, Central Criminal Court
John Hurlock represented O at his trial at the Central Criminal Court resulting in an acquittal for Possession of a Firearm with Intent to Endanger Life. The prosecution case was that O was either a passenger in the car involved in a shooting outside of a school in East London, or that he had helped to assist the shooter by providing a getaway car post shooting. The case was based around, and contextualised, using evidence of gang rivalries in the East London area. After successful legal argument, evidence relating to O’s involvement in gang activity and bad character was not presented before the jury. Following extensive cross examination and a strong closing speech John was able to establish that at no time was O in possession of the firearm. Due to this acquittal, O received a sentence of 9 years for Conspiracy to cause GBH, in contrast to sentences of 21 years and 25 years received by the co-defendants found guilty of the firearms and GBH offences.
R v PE, Birmingham Crown Court
John Hurlock ( led by David Nathan KC) represented PE who was alleged to be at the top of the chain of the supply of firearms and ammunition in the UK. The guns and ammunition he supplied were linked to 107 crime scenes, including several fatal shootings, and an attempt to shoot down a police helicopter. PE was also charged with smuggling banned handguns from the United States. The case was significant in that it highlighted the flaws in the law against firearms in England and Wales. During the sentencing of PE, the Judge called on parliament to tighten up the laws against the importation of firearms, which was addressed in the subsequent Offensive Weapons Act 2019.
R v H
Defended a CIB3 “super grass”, who was linked to organised crime gangs in London. H was charged with robbery and then decided to give evidence against corrupt police officers and solicitors. John aided with the vetting process to enable H to become a “super grass” and the mitigation in his case.
John has regularly appeared in the Court of Appeal in relation to appeals against conviction and sentence and Attorney Generals References.
He has provided advice and/or second opinions on appeals to the Court of Appeal and potential CCRC references in cases where he was not trial counsel.
Notable murder & manslaughter cases
R v Youth Defendant ‘X’, Central Criminal Court
John Hurlock represented a 17-year-old defendant charged with murder and possession of a bladed article in a public place. Following service of a detailed defence case statement and opposition to witness anonymity orders the Crown offered no evidence.
X was 16 years old at the time when he fatally stabbed a male in the chest during a fight. X claimed that he was acting in self-defence after being stabbed himself, and in defence of his friend. A detailed defence case statement was served setting out X’s account and requesting disclosure of the deceased and his friends’ previous convictions, cautions, and intelligence about their criminal behaviour. The Crown applied to adduce anonymous witnesses who claimed to have seen the fight however, following successful opposition to the applications the Crown did not proceed with the application. This resulted in the Crown offering no evidence on both counts and the young male being released from a young offender’s institution.
R v AK, Reading Crown Court
Represented AK, led by Dean George KC, for a drug related county lines murder in Slough. The case involved cell site evidence, call data, and extensive disclosure requests regarding the main prosecution witness and victim. Due to these disclosure requests the entire nature of the prosecution’s case changed. The trial involved legal arguments on: loss of control, discharge of jurors, and bad character. AK was acquitted of Possession of a Bladed article following a successful submission of no case to answer. The jury unanimously acquitted AK of Conspiracy to Supply Class A drugs.
R v OC, Bristol Crown Court
John Hurlock, led by Dean George KC, represented OC (a young and vulnerable teenage girl) who was charged with murder linked to county lines drug offences. OC had been exploited to join a county lines gang and was present when another drug dealer murdered the head of the gang. OC refused to give evidence for the prosecution and was subsequently charged with the murder due to her presence. An abuse of process argument was made on this point, followed by a successful submission of no case to answer. John then later represented OC alone when the prosecution charged her with drug supplying offences related to her involvement in the county lines gang. As a result of strong mitigation, OC received a suspended sentence.
R v M, Central Criminal Court
Represented the father of a young woman murdered by her family in an “honour style” killing.
R v B
An allegation of the attempted Murder of two police officers, the case involved a thorough examination of expert evidence re the firing of guns and in particular the distinction between misfiring marks and light contact marks on a gun. The allegation was that during the course of a police chase the defendant on two separate occasions against two different police officers fired the gun at them but the gun didn’t fire. The defence case was that at no stage did he fire the gun, although he accepted he had it in his possession during the course of the chase. Not Guilty of both counts of attempted Murder.
R v P & Others
Allegation of a juvenile in a gang being involved in the murder of a rival gang member by an attack that began with kicking and punching him and which culminated in a stone slab being smashed on his head. Defence was present through some of incident but took no part in incident and didn’t join the agreement to cause the deceased serious harm or kill him. Not Guilty.
R v F & Others
Allegation of being involved in the murder of a traveller at a travellers wedding, kicking and punching the victim to death culminating with a table being smashed on his head. The defence was that the defendant was present but played no part in the assault. Not guilty.
R v A & Others
An allegation of the attempted Murder of a millionaire jeweler who was robbed and beaten to death with a champagne bottle by masked raiders.
John specialises in acting in all aspects of road traffic law including dangerous driving, drink driving, speeding and all other matters. He has successfully acted for a wide range of celebrity clients and many Premiership footballers and mangers.
