All Nexus Barristers:
Sam Stein QC is a specialist Criminal Defence Advocate, with extensive experience in large scale and high profile cases of; Murder, Historic Rape allegations, Armed Robbery, Fraud, Supply of Class A Drugs and Money Laundering. He is also instructed in Public Enquiries.
Sam has practiced in serious crime of all types for many years and has continued to work on some of the most significant and high profile cases whilst in Silk. His practice is exclusively defence. Sam has defended in many cases prosecuted as joint enterprise and has lectured extensively on the subject. He has particular experience in dealing with large-scale cases, developing novel points and cross-examinations regarding probe evidence.
Sam has considerable appellate experience having dealt successfully with specialist money laundering appeals and appeals against sentences. Amongst other cases of note where Sam acted are ‘The Dome Robbery’, the ‘Blue Lagoon Murder’ and the ‘Railway Murders’.
Ranked in Chambers & Partners (Queens Counsel – Crime) 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014.
The Grenfell Tower Inquiry
Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse ( IICSA ) Press Quotes
Instructed by ISN – Islington Survivors Network
R v SC,AT,AB & NC – Court of Criminal Appeal: In relation to issue of whether nitrous oxide is an exempt substance under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016
R v Mulcahy: The longest ever single defendant murder trial in English legal history. The result of three separate police investigations with the original investigation being the largest police manhunt since the Yorkshire Ripper.
R v Adams: The Dome Robbery. Arguably the most audacious robbery since the Great Train Robbery. The result of a massive police operation and lengthy investigation.
R v Grant & Others: Multi-handed conspiracy to murder – acquitted.
R v Gul: The ‘Turkish Mafia Baybasin’ case covering allegations of blackmail, kidnapping, torture and money laundering. The primary source of evidence was a probe placed in the defendant’s premises recording over six months, thousands of hours of material.
R v Matiluko: The Harmondsworth Detention Centre Riot – acquitted after piecing together hundreds of hours of CCTV material to accurately form a picture of the events involving the defendant.
R v Walker: Large scale conspiracy to supply class A; successfully appealed confiscation finding to the CA.
R v Kearney: Police corruption case, ground breaking legal argument re: ECHR Article 10 (2) journalist right to protect sources. Prosecuted by Sir Allan Green QC, offered no evidence following argument.
R v Kusi-Appiah: Mortgage frauds dealing with 47 residential properties: On instructions negotiated a plea ensuring that wife would not be proceeded against.
Drugs / Money Laundering
R v Carden: Successful defence of first defendant in money laundering and drug supply allegations involving analysis of the Defendant’s business interests and cash flow over a period of about 5 years.
R v Crocker: Successfully represented first defendant in extensive money laundering allegations covering 7 years of a building firms operation and financial analysts evidence which was the subject of detailed cross- examination by Sam leading to the successful half time submission. Court of Appeal denied the Crown’s application to challenge the Judge’s decision.
R v Evans: Money laundering and drugs smuggling case involving the importation of substantial quantities of cocaine concealed in a specially adapted vehicle.
R v S Operation Zambezi: First on indictment, multi-handed attempted murder, money laundering, firearms, cocaine and cannabis conspiracy with voluminous Queen’s Evidence – 107 page statement following 80+ interviews of QE Witness. Legal submissions resulting both in the exclusion of background violence and in the finding of an implicit waiver of privilege over solicitor’s material on the part of the QE Witness. This matter is the subject of an ongoing appeal.
R v Zachariah: Multi-Million Pound Drug and Money Laundering Conspiracy, argued disclosure and RIPA points relating to 7 months of recorded material equaling thousands of pages of transcripts.
R v N: Representing Chairman of Aston Rothbury Co Ltd on allegations of laundering the proceeds of frauds on UK clearing banks.
R v Dixon & Others: Conspiracy to Supply Class A and money laundering – Ipswich Crown Court – successful plea bargain negotiated.
R v Tran: Drugs and Money Laundering. Sam’s successful opposition of the Crown’s application to introduce hearsay evidence using the recently decided case of Al Khawaja resulted in the acquittal of all 5 defendants.
Youths Murder / Manslaughter
R v B: Represented first defendant alleged to have murdered a stall holder in a market as part of a ‘joint enterprise’ revenge attack. Successfully argued that the Defendant should be entitled to rely upon the fact that he suffered from a severe type of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder [ADHD] called hyperkinetic
disorder when presenting his defence of self defence as well as in support of the alternative defence of diminished responsibility.
R v D: Successfully represented first defendant in ‘joint enterprise’ robbery of an elderly man targeted as he was suspected of having kept gold at his premises. Only defendant acquitted in this multi-handed case.
R v P: Manslaughter and robbery allegation involving youths and a ‘joint enterprise’ attack on another youth who when being chased and then died under the wheels of a bus.
R v SH: Attempted murder of another youth, Sam advised that psychiatric and psychological evidence be obtained relating to the victims memory of the incident and the effect of the trauma and treatment leading to memory loss and possible confabulation. Defendant successfully acquitted.
R v B: The manslaughter by ‘stoning a man to death’ of a man in his 60’s playing cricket with his son by a gang of 10-13 year old boys. This was the centre of huge public and media interest before and during the trial.
Argued that the fatal cardiac arrhythmia was not necessarily connected to throwing of stones by the boys as his fatal symptoms have been initiated at the start of the arguments between the parties. Conviction successfully overturned on Appeal.
R v H: Joint enterprise manslaughter allegation suggesting that a group of youths intimidated another and then chased him onto the tracks of the Docklands Light Railway where he was instantly killed by a train.
Non-Jury Trial Cases
Appeal of Hibberd: Following the first non-jury trial in 350 years, the Appeal before the Lord Chief Justice The appeal centered on the failure to appoint a disclosure judge, disclosure issues generally and the possible ‘bias’ of the High Court Judge stemming from his having been shown apparently prejudicial material ex parte. This matter is subject to an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
Appeal of Guthrie: Consolidated Appeal, representing all appellants. Jury tampering, trial judge ruled that trial should continue to verdicts without a jury. This matter is subject to an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights.
R v Hibberd: The fourth trial of the ‘Heathrow Robbers’ following allegations of jury tampering, this became the first trial in England and Wales to take place without a Jury before Mr. Justice Treacy at the Royal Courts of Justice.
Murder / Manslaughter
R v Brown: ‘Jekyll and Hyde’ murder of ex-girlfriend, six pathologists were instructed on behalf of the Crown requiring detailed cross-examination on the possible signs left in the internal structure of the brain from an alleged smothering of the deceased
R v Cowdry: Plea to murder successfully secured minimum term for a robbery and deliberate strangulation of elderly householder
R v James: Murder, argued on behalf of the defendant that his mother’s long-term sexual abuse of him since he was a child was a ‘trigger’ for new defence of ‘loss of control’
R v S: Argued that a defendant’s long term alcohol addiction was a recognised mental health basis for his defence of diminished responsibility
R v Khaleel: Murder, bad character evidence challenged before the jury and the court was persuaded to call a crucial witness from the first trial (manslaughter conviction in similar circumstances), which formed the basis of the bad character application.
R v Roberts & Others: Blue Lagoon Murder. Widely reported murder involving 6 defendants and the ritual
torture of a vulnerable adult, ultimately leading to his death. His dismembered body was discovered in a lake. R v P: Successful defence of a drug addict alleged to have murdered another in an argument about a drug deal.
R v Hong: Murder allegation; Diabetic hyperglaecamic defence raised to explain the defendant’s memory loss at the time of the stabbing.
R v Turauskaite: Murder allegation involving lengthy cross examination of ‘best friend’ to show that he was responsible for the death.
R v Gayle & Others: ‘Joint enterprise’ alleged gangland Murder – Central Criminal Court – acquitted. R v Ramanlal: Murder allegation; argued diminished responsibility defence.
R v K: Successful defence of two sisters alleged to have killed their grandmother for her funeral money.
R v P: Successfully defended a series of rape allegations alleged to have been committed with the context of a violent marriage.
R v D: Historic homosexual rape allegations successfully stayed as an abuse of the courts process.
R v B: Defended a catholic priest alleged to have committed multiple sexual offences against children over many years.
R v P: Successful defence of a series of alleged ‘revenge’ rapes of very young children.
R v M: Incest case historic allegation suggesting very long-term rapes of the defendant’s own children.
R v T: Successfully negotiated a plea to sexual touching after lengthy negotiations with the prosecution regarding the Defendant’s youth, status as a victim of abuse, Autism and Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD).
R v M: Scoutmaster accused of indecent images and sexual assaults successfully negotiated a plea to limited offences leading to a much reduced sentence.
R v K: Successful plea negotiation in a case involving Genetic Sexual Attraction (GSM) mitigation presented included argument about the research in this area and the surprising number of individuals who have been affected by this condition.
R v Momo: Successful appeal against conviction as a result of admission in trial of co-defendants character. R v Senior & Senior: Leading case in relation to questioning when carrying out stop and search powers.
R v Walker: Successfully argued that there should be no confiscation of Appellant’s trust monies despite his conviction for possession of class A drugs with intent to supply.
Appointments & Memberships
Advocacy Trainer, Inner Temple Bencher, Inner Temple
Chair of Standards for the BSB Criminal Bar Association South Eastern Circuit
Education & Qualifications
Keble Advanced Advocacy Course
I am a ‘Trainer Trainer’ (highest Advocacy Training Council qualification) qualified Advocacy Trainer meaning that I can train other advocates in the Hempel Advocacy Training Method. I have many years experience as an advocacy trainer for the Inner Temple and the ATC both within the UK and Internationally. I have also been a Keble Advocacy Trainer for a number of years training on the South Eastern Circuits Higher Advocacy Training Course.
I have both undertaken and been a trainer on vulnerable witness training courses.
Working with Andrew Jefferies QC I have prepared and delivered bespoke training for solicitors dealing with all aspects of court craft; including examination in chief, cross examination, legal submissions, written arguments and speech making.
I am available for bespoke advocacy training sessions and dealing with one to one training or groups of up to ten at a time.
Joint Enterprise – Working with Andrew Jefferies QC Sam has delivered a lecture dealing with Joint Enterprise for a number of solicitors firms and chambers over the last few years. This is a careful examination of the law, the best suggestions for the successful defence against these allegations and setting out both a critique and proposals for change. We call this lecture ‘Let’s do it together’.
Recently Sam and Andrew Jefferies QC have provided written submissions to the Law Commission who are considering the law as it relates to joint enterprise and potential change in this area. The Law Commission have recently been kind enough to inform me that they have published these submissions.
The Use of Psychiatric Evidence in Cases of Self-defence – This lecture is available as an analysis of the law of self- defence and the use of psychiatric evidence in support of both the first limb of the defence i.e. whether the defendant believed that he needed to act in self-defence and in support of the second question that arise in self-defense the reasonableness of the force used in self defence.