- Call 020 7936 6300 or Email
R v EDR - Harrow Crown Court sitting at Willesden Magistrates’ Court [2025]
Defendant was originally charged with section 18 GBH with intent and possession of an offensive weapon after an unprovoked incident involving an unknown complainant—offences carrying a real risk of a “dangerousness” finding if convicted. Through detailed preparation and sensitive representation, the Defence presented comprehensive evidence of the Defendant’s significant vulnerabilities, including his diagnosed physical and mental health conditions, learning difficulties, and the psychotic state he was experiencing at the time of the incident. On the day of trial, the Crown accepted pleas to the lesser offence of section 20 GBH instead. The Defendant ultimately received a sentence of time served.
R v AS – Isleworth Crown Court [2025]
The 16-year-old defendant who had committed offences at age 15 entered guilty pleas to section 18 grievous bodily harm, violent disorder, possession of a bladed article, and possession of cannabis. Notwithstanding this being the defendant’s fifth conviction for a knife-related offence and having previously been sentenced to and breached a Youth Rehabilitation Order with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance, the court was persuaded through compelling oral submissions and comprehensive mitigation to impose a further Youth Rehabilitation Order with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance despite custody being an option available.
R v MB – Ipswich Crown Court [2025]
Secured unanimous acquittals in a 7-day trial for a defendant who faced two counts of assault on emergency workers before the Resident Judge after just 76 minutes of jury deliberation and successfully opposed two prosecution bad character applications. The case received local media coverage which can be viewed here.
R v DD - Harrow Crown Court sitting at Willesden Magistrates’ Court [2025]
Defendant acquitted of assaulting an emergency worker. The prosecution case was that the defendant assaulted a police officer while attempting to flee, motivated by the desire to conceal a lock knife that was later discovered in his possession. The defendant had initially entered ‘not guilty’ pleas to both offences, but later accepted possession of the bladed article. The Crown argued that the defendant’s initial dishonesty about the knife undermined his credibility regarding the assault allegation. The defendant received a conditional discharge for the bladed article count.
R v AJ – Ipswich Crown Court [2025]
Jury returned a not guilty verdict following a five-day trial for a defendant charged with one count of sexual assault. The case involved complex challenges stemming from the defendant’s significant vulnerabilities, but their good character was effectively maintained.
R v HS – Portsmouth Crown Court [2025]
Instructed to represent an Indian national charged with multiple serious sexual offences, including two counts of rape and two counts of assault by penetration, arising from a non-domestic “stranger rape” allegation. The defendant faced the real prospect of a finding of dangerousness and an extended sentence. Through meticulous preparation of a comprehensive sentencing note and persuasive oral submissions, the court was persuaded not to impose a finding of dangerousness, despite the nature of the offences. A total sentence of 9 years’ imprisonment was imposed. The court also declined to impose a Sexual Harm Prevention Order, heavily criticising the prosecution’s draft as “vague, disproportionate, unenforceable and unnecessary” following submissions.
R v PD – Portsmouth Crown Court [2025]
Suspended Sentence Order imposed on the defendant charged with 7 serious offences including making indecent images of children (Category A, B and C), distribution of indecent images (Category A and B), and possession of prohibited images and extreme pornography. This was a particularly challenging case given the defendant’s extensive relevant previous convictions, and the nature of the distribution offences, which typically result in immediate custody. Through thorough case preparation and effective advocacy, a comprehensive defence sentencing note was prepared demonstrating the defendant’s efforts toward rehabilitation.
R v AR - Sheffield Crown Court [2026]
Following further representations from the Defence, the Crown conceded on the second day of trial that it was not in the public interest to prosecute and there was no realistic prospect of conviction. The Crown offered no evidence, and a formal not guilty verdict was returned. Despite complications arising from the defendant’s multiple vulnerabilities, the result ensures the defendant’s good character remains intact.
R v CR - Portsmouth Crown Court [2026]
Not Guilty verdicts obtained in 27 minutes. The jury unanimously acquitted the defendant who was charged with two counts of threatening with an offensive weapon in a public place. The defence exposed fundamental flaws in the prosecution’s case through thorough cross examination of the five prosecution witnesses highlighting the many inconsistencies. The Judge delivered scathing criticism of the Crown’s charging decision, questioning why the defendant’s serious allegations against the complainants, including burglary of her property, were never investigated. As evidence emerged during trial, it became clear the defendant’s claims had merit. The Judge openly enquired whether prejudice influenced the decision to charge the defendant, while ignoring equally serious allegations against the complainants in this neighbour dispute. The jury saw through the imbalance, deliberating for less than half an hour before delivering unanimous Not Guilty verdicts on all counts.
R v AF - Reading Crown Court [2026]
Suspended Sentence Order imposed for perverting the course of justice, an offence typically resulting in immediate custody. The defendant made multiple attempts to persuade a complainant to withdraw a rape allegation, including police contact and impersonation of a family member. Through meticulous preparation, including a detailed psychiatric report and comprehensive sentencing note, the defence successfully presented compelling mitigation that convinced the court to suspend the sentence, securing liberty despite the gravity of the offence and sentencing guidelines.
R v AA – Inner London Crown Court [2025]
Following representations, the Crown was persuaded to offer no evidence against the defendant, who faced two separate indictments for various either-way offences. The case presented challenges due to the defendant’s vulnerability.
R v JW – Chelmsford Crown Court [2025]
Following a successful application to vacate the defendant’s plea in the Magistrates’ Court, successful representations were made to the Crown in Crown Court proceedings to review prosecution in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors with additional reference to the CPS guidance on suspects and defendants with mental health conditions or disorders. This case presented unique challenges due to the defendant’s significant vulnerability, but their good character status was preserved.
R v UR – Stoke-On-Trent Crown Court [2025]
The defendant was sentenced for an offence of violent disorder while serving a 15-year sentence for drug and modern slavery offences. The violent disorder was committed on a separate occasion involving different circumstances. The judge was persuaded to impose a short sentence concurrent to his existing sentence.
Fatima is often instructed on post-conviction matters, including criminal appeals.
Fatima is frequently instructed on a post-conviction basis in relation to complex issues of confiscation.
Hertfordshire Constabulary v RK [2026]
Successfully represented a Detective Sergeant at an accelerated misconduct hearing. The officer faced two separate allegations of accessing police systems without policing purpose. It was the appropriate authority’s position that the officer’s behaviour cumulatively amounted to gross misconduct.
RSPCA v IS & KZS – Luton Crown Court [2025]
Low-level Community Orders imposed on both defendants who were convicted of serious animal cruelty offences.
Police v BV – Lewes Crown Court [2024]
Successful application to discharge an indefinite Sexual Harm Prevention Order.
2019: Called to the Bar of England and Wales
2014- 2015: Bar Professional Training Course, Very Competent
2011- 2014: LLB (Hons). Upper Second-Class Degree
The Society of Young Legal Aid Lawyers
Human Rights Lawyers’ Association
Young Fraud Lawyers’ Association
Women In Criminal Law
The Criminal Bar Association
Financial Services Lawyers Association
The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple
Young Bar Mentoring (Mentor)
Youth Justice Legal Centre
When Does a Deferred Prosecution Agreement Actually Expire?
HELLO … I’M STILL ON REMAND… GET ME OUT OF HERE!
The FCA Takeover – A New Era for Anti-Money Laundering Supervision at the Bar
Baniulyte – Modern Slavery Defence and the Limits of Anonymity
Crime Doesn’t Pay (If You Can Actually Catch the Cash)
The Crown Court sitting as a Magistrates Court and the importance of due process
I’M ON REMAND … GET ME OUT OF HERE!
Addressing Racial Disparity in the Youth Justice System – A Critical Analysis
Accountability or Anonymity – A Critical Analysis of Police Reform in England and Wales
Inadequate arguments – the circumstances in which confiscation orders can be revised
The Mental Health Act 1983-is it fighting fit?
Is cash king? The fundamental shift in retail banking, the FCA concerns and approach.
Should things be done about Res Gestae evidence?
More transparency, or naming and shaming? The FCA’s proposed new approach to enforcement.
Sexism in the City and the FCA
Virtual certainty and foresight of consequences – where are we now?
Arabic – Fluent
Somali – Fluent
Attorney General’s civil junior juniors panel counsel.
Public Access qualified.
Suspended Sentence Order imposed for perverting the course of justice, an offence typically resulting in immediate custody. The defendant…
Fatima Jama secures unanimous not guilty verdicts for two counts of threats with an offensive weapon in a public place…
Fatima Jama evaluates the Divisional Court’s ruling in Guralp Systems Limited v Director of the Serious Fraud Office [2026] EWHC…