Crown offer no evidence following extensive legal argument regarding the admissibility of ABE


Stacey-lee Holland, instructed by Arlene Mansoor of Shearman Bowen, secured an acquittal of her young client in a county lines drugs case. The client was charged with being involved in a three handed conspiracy to supply class A drugs in the Essex area. The client was identified by a police officer who claimed to have recognised him, however Stacey-lee successfully sought to exclude the identification evidence on the basis that the officer did not comply with the procedure for identification as provided for by PACE Code D. The Crown principle witness was considered to be vulnerable and as such her statement was taken by way of an ABE video interview, however Essex police failed to follow the protocol for conducting said interviews leading to extensive legal argument in relation to the admissibility of the ABE transcript. The witness also failed to attend the trial at which stage the prosecution sought to apply to adduce her evidence under the hearsay provisions. Stacey-lee objected to the admissibility of said evidence after which the prosecution opted to offer no evidence. During the final hearing the Judge indicated that he was impressed by Stacey-lee's "professionalism and the tenacity with which she pursued her client’s defence throughout the case.”


Stacey-lee Holland is a barrister in chambers, specialising in criminal law. To instruct Stacey-lee, contact our clerks at clerks@2drj.com or on 020 7936 2613.


Recent Posts

See All

R v Onasanya (and another) (2021)

Twanieka Alcindor defended Mr Onasanya at the Exeter Crown Court who was jointly indicted for Conspiracy to supply class a drug’s in a county lines operation spanning 6 months and valued at £85,000. T