In July 2024, our client faced serious allegations following a confrontation on Clapham Common, South London, which resulted in a man sustaining two superficial stab wounds to the back. The incident began when our client and his girlfriend were walking through the park and encountered a group of five men, including the complainant. The group alleged that the couple had attempted to rob them, which led to a physical altercation.
The circumstances of the incident
As tensions escalated, our client found himself significantly outnumbered. During the course of the confrontation, he produced a knife and two wounds were inflicted upon one of the complainants. It is important to note that, despite the dramatic nature of the accusations, medical evidence confirmed that the injuries were superficial in nature.
The police were called to the scene and proceeded to arrest our client. While he was being restrained and detained by officers, members of the complainant’s group continued to physically attack him. Despite the presence of the police, our client was subjected to ongoing violence, a detail that was later brought before the court as part of the defence.
Our client made full admissions to being in possession of the knife and acknowledged causing the injuries. As a result, he was charged with section 18 grievous bodily harm (GBH) with intent — one of the most serious non-fatal offences under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.
Presenting a case for self-defence
A nine-day trial took place at Inner London Crown Court, during which the defence presented a carefully constructed case demonstrating that the injuries were not inflicted with intent to cause serious harm, but rather in a moment of panic and fear, as our client sought to defend himself against a group of five aggressors.
The defence argued that the prosecution could not prove beyond reasonable doubt that our client had formed any intention to cause serious injury. Instead, the evidence supported the conclusion that he had acted instinctively, in self-defence, and without premeditation.
Throughout the trial, our legal team challenged the credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses and highlighted inconsistencies in their accounts. We also emphasised the disproportionate force used by the group of complainants during and after the initial incident.
Jury delivers unanimous not guilty verdict
On the ninth day of trial the jury returned a unanimous verdict. They acquitted our client of the more serious charge under section 18 GBH and instead found him guilty of the lesser alternative: section 20 GBH, which does not require proof of intent to cause serious harm. This outcome reflects the jury’s recognition of the mitigating context in which the incident occurred.
Our client is now awaiting sentencing, which is scheduled to take place in August 2025. He remains out of custody on bail, and the court will consider a range of factors, including the context of the offence, the level of harm caused, and the defendant’s personal circumstances and lack of previous convictions.
This case was litigated by Kimberley Young, with Manisha Knights serving as the trial advocate. Their meticulous preparation, strategic presentation of the facts, and unwavering commitment to justice played a crucial role in securing this outcome.
