Adam Kirke

Adam appeared for the Appellant who had received a total of 6 months’ imprisonment following a mandatory minimum sentence. Adam argued four grounds of appeal and was successful in three (though the fourth ground was an alternative and thus not considered). The COA deemed that the most appropriate sentence would have been one of a low-level community order, however, as the Appellant had already served some time in custody since the initial sentencing hearing, a short custodial sentence was imposed. This resulted in the Applicant’s immediate release from custody.

Adam represented a defendant charged with the attempted kidnap of a 6-year-old child. The case was set down for a s28 hearing to cross-examine the vulnerable complainant though, following discussions with the prosecutor, the Crown accepted a plea to affray.

Multi-handed affray trial. On day two of the trial, the Crown disclosed an additional violent suspect who had been NFA’d. Consequently, Adam successfully persuaded the Crown that it would not be in the public interest to try J.

Adam appeared as D1 in a violent kidnapping trial. After successfully resisting the Crown’s application to adduce the complainant’s evidence as hearsay (under the fear provisions); the Crown offered no evidence.

Unanimously acquitted in a two-handed ABH where the defence related to the use of reasonable force against an individual wanted for rape and breach of a life licence relating to two further rapes.

Successful appeal against conviction following a submission of no case to answer involving an allegation of obstruct PC. Adam was able to successfully argue that the force used by officers at the time of a search was unlawful through a variety of breaches of PACE Codes.

Robbery trial involving a youth defendant and youth witnesses where identity was in issue. Offence captured on CCTV but at the close of the Crown’s case, Adam was able to successfully argue that there was no case to answer.

Adam represented a client who had long standing mental health issues. He was charged with three counts of possessing a bladed article and two breaches of Heathrow byelaws. After obtaining expert psychiatric evidence it was concluded that the client was not able to understand proceedings but neither a hospital order nor guardianship order was appropriate under s37 of the Mental Health Act 1983. In addition, no special measures or the use of an intermediary would have been of assistance to the defendant. Consequently, Adam argued that to try the defendant would be an abuse of process as the defendant could not receive a fair trial. Upon receipt of Adam’s skeleton argument and supporting documentation, the Crown conceded that it would not be in the public interest to prosecute the defendant.

Successful submission of no case to answer concerning an allegation of exposure where the offence had been captured on CCTV and was supported by eyewitness accounts. Following cross-examination, both witnesses to the offence conceded that they could not be sure of seeing the actions alleged.

Instructed prosecution counsel in an aggravated burglary relying on DNA evidence (ongoing).

Instructed counsel in a long running and multi-handed conspiracy to steal (ongoing).

Conviction in a class A drugs supply case involving the use of cell site material.

Prosecution counsel in a multi-count indictment alleging various domestic violence offences, including an offence of intentional strangulation. D sentenced to 39 months’ imprisonment.

Conviction in a multi-handed allegation of being concerned in the production of cannabis.

Instructed prosecution counsel in a case concerning the transfer of £70,500 suspected to be money laundering (ongoing).

Instructed prosecution counsel in ongoing POCA proceedings relating to a defendant convicted of selling kilograms of cocaine.

Defence counsel for a defendant who had pleaded guilty to two counts of fraud involving over £18,000 of benefit fraud. Following mitigation, Adam secured a small financial penalty and 6 days unpaid work.

Adam was seconded to the business crime department of a law firm predominantly advising on the recent implementation of the Russian sanctions.