Emma Lewis

Director / Barrister

Emma Lewis

Director / Barrister

Emma Lewis joined in July 2019 having been called to the bar in 2016 and completing pupillage in 2018. Although regularly in the Crown Court, Emma’s passion has always been at the grass root level. Assisting clients from the moment they are arrested.

Emma Lewis – biography

Emma possesses a steadfast passion for defence, especially in the realms of youth and gang intervention, where she has cultivated a strong clientele. Her focus primarily centres on representing underprivileged young men. She collaborates closely with external organisations to ensure ongoing support for her clients long after their cases are resolved. This commitment has proven increasingly vital. Particularly given the surge in National Referral Mechanism (NRM) referrals and cases involving Modern Slavery defences.

Despite being younger than most of her co-counsel Emma has a ferocious nature to advocacy. She will not shy away from difficult submissions or standing up for what she feels is right. Her rigour means that she is a go-to advocate for difficult bail applications or sentencing.

Becoming a Director

To ensure that her clients’ defence is well tested and supported by evidence Emma is very detailed in her case preparation. She’ll often utilise wide-ranging expert reports. She has been able to build a large client base across London and greater London which is due to her client care and high acquittal rate. Emma will happily take calls from the police station and will be the first point of contact.

Due to her unwavering dedication and commitment to both her clients and MK Law, Emma was appointed as a Director. She looks after the Shoreditch office.

Emma Lewis
Director / Barrister
emma.lewis@mk-law.co.uk
07483 034 292
Solicitor since: 2016
With MK Law since: Jul 2019

LinkedIn

Just some of Emma’s reviews

Some of Emma’s notable cases

This case was heard at the Central Criminal Court and concerned allegations of conspiracy to possess firearms with intent, as well as grievous bodily harm. The prosecution case related to a series of alleged shootings across Hackney and East London. Following a six-week trial, the defendant was acquitted of all charges.

This case was heard at Snaresbrook Crown Court and involved a client charged with bringing illicit items, including drugs, mobile phones, and chargers, into the dock while attending court for sentencing in an unrelated matter. The defence advanced a case of exploitation, arguing that the client had been used by others in the commission of the offence. On the day of trial, the prosecution offered no evidence, and the client was formally found Not Guilty.

This case was heard at Basildon Crown Court and involved serious allegations of blackmail, kidnap, and grievous bodily harm. The defence advanced a case of mistaken identification, challenging the reliability of the evidence said to link the defendant to the offences. Following a three-week trial, the jury returned unanimous not guilty verdicts on all counts.

Press coverage

This case was heard at Snaresbrook Crown Court and involved a defendant charged with four counts of Section 18 grievous bodily harm, arising from allegations that he had stabbed four males. The prosecution also alleged that, while on bail for those matters, the defendant committed further offences of possession with intent to supply controlled drugs.

This case was heard at Maidstone Crown Court and involved an allegation of perverting the course of justice linked to a murder investigation. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had taken steps to interfere with the administration of justice in relation to the underlying offence.

The case was a complex, multi-defendant trial lasting approximately three months, requiring detailed examination of the evidence and alleged roles of each party involved.

Represented a client charged with attempted murder arising from an incident at Notting Hill Carnival in 2024, involving allegations of the use of a 12-inch zombie-style knife.

The case attracted significant publicity and required robust defence advocacy, including extensive cross-examination of multiple prosecution witnesses. This included detailed challenges to eyewitness testimony, notably from police officers present at the scene.

Press coverage