Christina graduated with a degree in Journalism and went on to study Law gaining valuable advocacy experience throughout her training by representing clients at mental health tribunals.
She qualified as a solicitor in 2009 and has been practicing as a Criminal Solicitor on the South East London Circuit for the last decade. Christina’s focus on Criminal Law harnesses her commitment to helping vulnerable people and guiding them through the complexities of the legal process. She strives to do her absolute best for every client and to achieve excellent results across the board.
R v O – Murder. Defendant one of seven accused of stabbing victim in knife attack. Unanimously acquitted.
R v O – Attempted murder. Defendant alleged to have attacked complainant in HMP Belmarsh by slashing his throat and identified as perpetrator by prison staff. Unusually this case involved the defence calling the complainant as a defence witness. Unanimously acquitted.
R v S – Murder. Defendant alleged to have stabbed his partner multiple times. Ran defence of ‘diminished responsibility’ which involved expert psychiatric evidence on behalf of both the prosecution and the defence.
R v U – Conspiracy to import Class A drugs. Defendant allegedly involved in a large-scale importation of Class A drugs, with a street value of approximately £5 million, from Romania into the UK. Following successful half-time submissions, the jury was directed to record a not guilty.
R v G – Making an explosive substance with intent to endanger life. Defendant alleged to have constructed a home-made ‘hand grenade’ with the intention of using it to cause death or serious injury. Unanimously acquitted.
R v G – Wounding with intent, unlawful wounding, attempted wounding with intent and possession of bladed article. Defendant alleged to have attempted to stab two complainants, puncturing a lung. Defence was self-defence. Acquitted on all counts.
R v A – Kidnap, conspiracy to supply Class A drugs, GBH, possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life. Defendant charged on a 12-count indictment of kidnap, shooting and stabbing in a “drug deal gone wrong”, facing a potential life sentence if convicted. The Crown was persuaded to accept guilty pleas on three counts and the defendant was sentenced to eight years custody.
R v L, R v O, R v M – Conspiracy to kidnap, falsely imprison and blackmail. Defendants alleged to have attacked and kidnapped a drug dealer who was then detained and assaulted while an attempt was made to extract money from his family.
R v E – GBH. Defendant was a vulnerable adult with learning difficulties alleged to have attacked her partner with a knife. She maintained that she had acted in self-defence. The defence obtained psychiatric reports and made successful representations to the Crown which resulted in no evidence being offered against her.
R v L, R v O – Wounding with intent. Multi-handed case, defendants alleged to have chased and stabbed the complainant. On the day of trial the defendants pleaded guilty to the lesser offence of affray and received a one year custodial sentence.
R v D – Rape. 16-year-old defendant charged with rape and sexual assault. The Youth Court deemed this to be a ‘novel and complex’ case and granted an application by the defence to instruct Queen’s Counsel. Following representations by the defence the Crown amended the charges, the defendant pleaded guilty to lesser offences and was sentenced to a Youth Rehabilitation Order.
R v R – Rape. Defendant charged with multiple counts of rape involving numerous disclosure issues, including repeated requests by the defence for telephone evidence that ultimately supported the defendant’s account. Following a six-day trial he was unanimously acquitted by the jury after 45 minutes of deliberation.
R v W – Rape. Defendant charged with multiple counts of historical rape and sexual assault dating back around 30 – 40 years. Unanimously acquitted on all counts.
R v F – Attempt to meet a child following grooming. Defendant with significant learning difficulties was subjected to a sting operation by a vigilante group. The proceedings were subject to a lengthy abuse of process argument and the Crown subsequently offered no evidence.