Simon Eckersley
Called 1993- Lincoln’s Inn
University College, Oxford
A specialist defence practitioner, Simon has recently been instructed in a wide variety of significant criminal allegations, including: murder, manslaughter, rape and the sexual abuse of children, conspiracy to commit theft or fraud, as well as the supply of drugs. He has been instructed on the basis of being a leading junior as well as in his own right.
Simon receives instructions in relation to regulatory crime, especially those relating to licensed premises. He also has an interest in Sports Law, studying the discipline through a part-time university course.
Recent cases of interest:
R v Carl Powell [2011]
Recent instructions in relation to the alleged high-profile murder of Caroline Coyne.
R v Rowley and others [2011]
Recent instructions in an allegation of a large-scale fraud alleged to have been perpetrated against the DWP, said to involve over 100 individuals.
R v B [2011]
Defending in a case involving a historical allegation of rape and sexual assault, committed over a period of nearly two decades, against multiple complainants. The case involved advice and argument in relation to substantial social services disclosure (directly leading to acquittal on specific counts) as well as the cross examination of ‘damaged’ complainants.
R v Xu [2011]
Defence counsel in a trial of three Chinese students implicated in a sophisticated credit and debit card fraud involving stores such as Harrods and Selfridges.
R v Brightmore [2010]
Represented the primary defendant in a multi-handed diesel theft conspiracy, said to involve over £1,000,000. The client faced a number of other indictments, including an Environmental Health prosecution that was argued to be one of the worst of its type nationally. The served evidence amounted to nearly 15,000 pages, with huge quantities of unused material.
R v D [2009]
Represented the defendant in a successful appeal against his conviction for rape, on the basis of the non-disclosure of material that undermined the veracity of the complainant.
R v David Kent [2004]
Junior counsel in the Lincoln prison riots. Responsible for analysis of unused material that led to a successful submission that the pertinent evidence against the client should be excluded under s78 PACE. The prosecution offered no evidence after the ruling.
Simon spends his leisure time with his family, gardening, poetry, enjoying the occasional round of golf, watching all forms of sport and good food and wine.
