Samir Pasha

Experience

Criminal Defence

Samir has a wealth of experience across the criminal law spectrum, having represented clients charged with serious violence, drugs, firearms, sexual, financial crime and public order offences. He provides expert advice and representation with great care and attention no matter who the client is.

Samir has a busy criminal practice in both the magistrates and crown courts, including youth courts. His experience includes representing clients in bail hearings, breach of bail, breach of Suspended Sentence Orders and Criminal Behaviour Orders.

Samir is also a skilled advocate in motoring offences, providing persuasive representation to secure the best outcome for clients. He has built a specialism in motoring and traffic offences with the ability to represent clients in Exceptional Hardship and Special Reasons cases, both in the magistrates and crown courts.

Prior to joining, Samir had almost a decade of experience working in the wider legal profession, from large corporate firms to high street practices. He has previously worked as a civil servant for the Serious Fraud Office and received a commendation from the Director of the SFO for his investigative work.

Having worked on cases from both investigation/prosecution and defence perspectives Samir developed his experience of criminal investigations, dealing with clients and preparing defence cases in serious and financial crime. Samir has assisted on the legal teams of some of the world’s largest fraud and corruption cases and understands what steps are required to build a strong case, both for and against.

Notable Criminal Cases

R v JA – Snaresbrook Crown Court

Samir’s client was charged with being concerned in the supply of 51kg cocaine, with a value of over £6 million. The client was charged along with two other co-defendants, one had already pleaded guilty and the other co-defendant was found guilty by the jury.

After 6 -day trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court and almost 4 days of deliberation, the jury were unable to return a verdict on Samir’s client, resulting in a hung jury.

This case related to a huge, complex police operation relating to a lorry consignment of 51kg of cocaine being concealed inside the fuel tank of the lorry. The prosecution case relied heavily on surveillance and cell site data, which requires technical knowledge to navigate through in high value drugs trials.

R v MC – Isleworth Crown Court

Client was charged with Possession with Intent to Supply Cannabis.

The Prosecution’s case alleged the amount of cannabis material recovered at the client’s address was enough to show he was supplying drugs. However, Samir argued that the majority of the cannabis material was ‘stalks and stems’ which would have no retail value at all. This was also confirmed by an independent drugs expert.

After the non-sellable amount of cannabis material was discarded from the case, the only amount that was of any value was approximately 63g, to which the client had already pleaded guilty to in the magistrates court in 2022.

R v CT – Isleworth Crown Court

Client was jointly charged with another as part of a police investigation into exportation and conspiracy to supply almost 2kg of class A drugs.  The Prosecution relied on cell site data against Samir’s client, which allegedly showed him travelling around the country with his co-defendant.

Samir meticulously analysed the cell site evidence and made an application to dismiss the charge against his client. In response, the Prosecution decided to offer no evidence thereby formally acquitting his client.

R v AK – Central Criminal Court

Samir’s client was alleged to have failed to comply with his community order requirements on a number of occasions. The client had previously been sentenced for Robbery and other matters where he was given a community order with unpaid work hours.

Representations were made by Samir in relation to one of the two breaches which resulted in enquiries being undertaken by the Probation Service, resulting in the acceptance of just one breach by Probation.

R v VA – Harrow Crown Court

Client was charged with having been in possession of 2 x Category A videos that he received via WhatsApp, one video going back to 2017. The client maintained that he had never seen the videos as they were in old group chats that he did not access but remained part of the chat group.

An expert report was obtained and strong representations were made which highlighted that if a message has a ‘Read’ status, it does not necessarily mean that the message has been viewed by the recipient. Furthermore, if a user has set his WhatsApp settings to ‘Auto Download’ media, then any media received will automatically be saved onto the phone’s internal memory, whether the recipient has viewed that media file or not.

The Prosecution offered no evidence.

R v SS – Harrow Crown Court

An important criminal immigration offences case.

Samir’s client was charged at Harrow Crown Court with the offence of arriving in the UK without entry clearance, which is a new criminal offence under s40 Nationality and Borders Act 2022 (NABA), contrary to s24 (D1) Immigration Act 1971. This charge carries a maximum penalty of 4 years’ imprisonment. The client was also charged with entering the UK without a valid passport contrary to s2(1) Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claimants) Act 2004, which carries a maximum 2-year prison sentence.

R v TMA – Northampton Crown Court

Prosecution offered no evidence in a case against Samir’s client who was charged with Possession with Intent to Supply Class A drugs, at Northampton Crown Court. The client was charged with possession and supply of 120 wraps of cocaine following a search warrant being executed by police at a property in Kettering in January 2022.

Following a positive conclusive grounds decision by the Single Competent Authority that our client was a victim of modern slavery, representations were made and the CPS decided not to proceed to trial.

R v KD – Isleworth Crown Court

Client, a university student, was charged with possession of a knife at the 2023 Notting Hill Carnival in London, which was found in his bag. After strong representations being made to the Prosecution, no evidence was offered and a formal verdict of Not Guilty was entered by the Court.

R v CW – Reading Crown Court

Represented a client charged with 2 counts of Intentional Strangulation and 2 counts of Assault by Beating who was sentenced in Reading Crown Court, following a trial in Reading Magistrates Court. Non-Fatal Strangulation is a relatively new offence introduced under the Domestic Abuse Act 2021 which came into force on 7th June 2023. Following the Court of Appeal cases in R v Cook and R v Yorke, sentencing non-fatal strangulation cases remain complex due to lack of sentencing guidelines with only recent case law from earlier in 2023. Samir skillfully mitigated on behalf of the client with the crown court judge stating, “Mr Pasha has said everything that could be said”.

R v DG – Woolwich Crown Court

Samir Pasha secures a conditional discharge for a landlord client who had been found guilty in an unlawful eviction case.

In a rare private prosecution brought by the Royal Borough of Greenwich, Samir’s client was charged with unlawful eviction that occurred in 2020, which carries a maximum sentence of 2 years imprisonment.

This was a complex case that relied on novel points of law covering housing law and statutory defences. After a 5 day trial at Woolwich Crown Court, Samir’s client was given a conditional discharge alongside a costs order.

R v AA – Oxford Crown Court

Client, who was the wife, was charged and convicted in the magistrates court with assault by beating, allegedly punching her husband in the face. Samir was instructed to appeal against the conviction. Following a full day trial at Oxford Crown Court, which included cross examining the complainant and police officer who attended the scene, the appeal was allowed on the basis that there was not enough evidence to meet the high burden of proof.

R v JM – Isleworth Crown Court

Client was charged with a serious case of Witness Intimidation and Stalking. The client had sent hundreds of messages and calls to the victim, and had stalked at places of work and attended the victim’s home. The client had also breached his bail conditions not to contact the victim during the case. After meticulous preparation by Samir, he secured a 4 month sentence suspended for 12 months. Samir’s preparation and advocacy was highlighted by the sentencing judge.

R v DW – Inner London Crown Court

Client was charged with Breach of Suspended Sentence for drugs offences, suspended for 24 months. Client was charged with possession of cannabis and made full admission of the offence in the police interview. Samir successfully argued for the court not to activate the suspended sentence applying the sentencing guidelines and Sentencing Act 2020. The court agreed that it would be unjust to activate the sentence and was instead given a fine.

R v BA – Southwark Crown Court

Client was charged with Theft and Criminal Damage by his landlord. After thorough preparation and robust cross examination of the landlord the jury delivered unanimous verdicts of Not Guilty on both charges and the client was acquitted.

R v ZK – Luton Magistrates Court

Client was charged with Actual Bodily Harm, where he was accused of  punching the complainant in the face which broke his nose. After a trial which entailed a powerful cross examination of the complainant, where it was argued that the complainant was lying and had actually attacked the client first with another person, the client was found not guilty.

R v TG – Highbury Youth Court

Client, a youth, was charged with possession of a knife and given a 6 month Referral Order. CPS made an application for a Knife Crime Prevention Order to be made against the client, which Samir successfully resisted.

R v CA – Thames Magistrates Court

Client was arrested for over 50 battery breaches, and 8 location breaches which he was charged with breach of bail. Samir pointed out that the map was not adequate in setting out the boundaries and therefore could not be relied upon. The bench accepted Samir’s submission that there was a margin of error by the evidence produced by the CPS.

R v DHW – Willesden Magistrates Court

Client was arrested by police for a breach of curfew, namely, 15 breaches of his electronic tag. Samir reviewed all the papers provided by the CPS and EMS and pointed out that not all 15 breaches were fully set out in the papers. He argued that instructing solicitors and the client had complained to EMS previously that there were technical issues with the tag. The bench agreed that none of the breaches had been proved by the CPS and was immediately released.

R v FV – Westminster Magistrates Court

Client was charged with Stalking alleged by a female where he worked. The prosecution had photos and CCTV evidence of the client along with letters sent by the client. Samir successfully cross-examined the police officer, and argued that the behaviour the police were relying on did not actually constitute stalking, which the judge accepted. The police also applied for a Stalking Prevention Order, which Samir again successfully argued against being imposed.

R v S – Croydon Magistrates Court

Client was charged with Racially Aggravated Assault and Causing Harassment/ Distress Public Order offences, along with Criminal Damage. During trial, Samir successfully persuaded the district judge that in fact the CCTV of the incident showed the client was the actual victim. The CPS offered no evidence on the Public Order offences, and the client was given a conditional discharge for the criminal damage

Motoring Offences

Samir has developed an in-depth specialism in motoring offences and regularly represents clients across London and the Home Counties. He has a robust approach in representing arguments on behalf of clients who may be looking at ‘Totting Up’ disqualification or drink/drug driving offences. Samir has a meticulous method of preparing cases for Exceptional Hardship cases where the client is put at ease and given tailored legal advice.

Notable Motoring Offences Cases

R v GM – Aylesbury Crown Court

Appeal against conviction and sentence in a failure to provide driver information. After a trial, the client’s appeal was allowed.

R v MS – Basildon Crown Court

Appeal against 18 month disqualification sentence for drink driving successfully reduced to 12 months, which is the lowest possible disqualification available.

R v DB – Harrow Crown Court

Client’s appeal allowed for speeding on the A40.

R v MH – Guildford Magistrates Court

Client, a well-known rap artist and celebrity, was charged with speeding offences which made him liable to a ‘Totting Up’ disqualification. The impact would have devastated his music career. Samir successfully argued Exceptional Hardship and the client was given points on his licence and a fine.

R v LA – Brighton Magistrates Court

Samir successfully represented a local business person in pleading Exceptional Hardship

Regulatory

Samir has been developing a healthy practice in advising and representing professionals in regulatory and disciplinary proceedings on a national and international level.

Instructed to represent a doctor in professional disciplinary proceedings brought by the General Medical Council.

Instructed to advise and represent one of the eight international cricket players charged by the International Cricket Council on behalf of the Emirates Cricket Board with breaching the Anti-Corruption Code. The charges relate to allegations of match fixing of the Abu Dhabi T10 Cricket League 2021.