James Ross

R v W (2026) – Rape of a child under 13 (defending)
The defendant was accused of committing offences against a younger family member. Successful legal submissions on the exclusion and admissibility of evidence were made before and during the trial. At the end of proceedings, the defendant was acquitted by a unanimous jury.

R v C (2025) – Attempted rape (defending)
A successful defence of a man accused of attempted rape. During the trial, multiple prosecution witnesses were cross-examined in relation to inconsistent accounts and it was arranged for a defence witness, who was a serving member of the armed forces, to give evidence from abroad via video-link.

R v E (2025) – Causing grievous bodily harm with intent (multiple counts) (prosecuting)
Linked cases involving the same defendant across four indictments. Advice given to the CPS included an analysis of deficiencies in prosecution evidence, the need to add further counts to an indictment to cover allegations of unlawful wounding, and the need for updated bad character material that cross-referenced the different indictments. Pre-trial legal research focused on the degree to which dissociative states caused by voluntary long-term drug use affect the legal requirement for intention.

R v B (2024) – Sexual intercourse with a girl under 13 (defending).
Case preparation involved analysis of details of police investigations into other family members obtained through disclosure. The court accepted that this material was relevant and allowed it to provide a framework for agreed cross-examination of a vulnerable complainant. The defendant was subsequently acquitted.

R v S (2024) – Assault of a child under 13 by penetration (defending).
This trial involving historic sexual allegations resulted in a hung jury. The prosecution’s analysis of the testimony of the complainant under cross-examination caused them to subsequently offer no evidence rather than seek a retrial.

R v G (2024) – Causing a child under 13 to engage in sexual activity (defending)
A case involving historic sexual allegations within a family. Legal argument was submitted regarding the administering of police cautions on linked offences and their effect on matters still to be tried.

R v H (2023) – Ill-treatment of a subordinate (defending).
In the Court Martial, defended a British Army Instructor accused of mistreating several cadets during training. Analysis of complaints contained within hundreds of pages of unused material led to successful cross-examination of all complainants and the defendant’s acquittal of all allegations. This case was subsequently reported in the national press.

R v W, C & N (2023) – Conspiracy to supply cocaine (prosecuting).
Advice was given to the CPS and officers from the NCA regarding sufficiency of evidence in relation to different members of a conspiracy to supply 5kg of cocaine. This advice was followed by two defendants pleading guilty and no evidence being offered against a third.

R v P (2022) – Supplying articles for use in fraud (prosecuting)
Defendant made bespoke software programs for fraud that he sold to criminals on the dark web. The evidence was exceptionally technical and the material covered in pre-trial conferences combined analysis of the differing ingredients of criminal offences with the knowledge of software experts from the Metropolitan Police Dedicated Card and Payment Unit as to how fraud-enabling software is created and operated. Suggested changes to the indictment led to the defendant pleading guilty to multiple counts on the eve of trial

R v D (2022) – Strangulation (prosecuting)
Defendant pleaded guilty during the trial after successful res gestae hearsay application for bodycam footage of absent victim to be played to the jury.

R v E (2022) – Sexual activity with a child by a person in a position of trust (defending)
This case involved travel to the Falkland Islands for a week-long trial. In addition to the normal preparation needed for such a sensitive case, this matter required familiarization with Falkland Islands Law and its points of difference with practice in England.

R v T (2022) – Rape of a girl under 13 (Defending)
Successfully defended a man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl after cross-referencing details of the complainant’s account with records of police involvement with her family obtained through prosecution disclosure.

R v P (2021) – Assisting unlawful immigration to a member state (prosecuting).
The case involved thoroughly explaining the workings of an organised crime gang through telephone and cell-site analysis whilst simultaneously avoiding any prejudice to ongoing NCA operations. The defendant pleaded guilty following a two-day case opening and the beginning of the prosecution evidence.

Crown Prosecution Service – Grade 3 Prosecutor

Criminal Bar Association