I qualified as a solicitor in 2000 after completing my training contract with HJA and became a partner in 2010. I am a dedicated Criminal Defence Solicitor covering all aspects of criminal defence work and representing clients during all stages of their case. I am part of the fraud team and represent clients facing complex fraud allegations, confiscation and cash seizure applications.
I represent clients from the moment of arrest through to trial. I am known for my proactive case preparation, investigating all possible leads, as well as my close attention to detail.
My particular expertise is in dealing with offences relating to alleged possession of indecent images and serious sexual offences, including historic sexual offences.
I have a strong commitment to legal aid and protecting the rights of individuals to have high quality representation under legal aid.
I am rated by the Legal 500 as “extremely reliable.”
- BSc (hons) Imperial College, London.
- CPE and LPC, College of Law, Guildford (commendations in both).
- Partner Hodge Jones & Allen – 2010
- Associate Solicitor Hodge Jones & Allen – 2006
- Training contract Hodge Jones & Allen 1998 – 2000
- “I was very happy with the service I received from Samira and want to say thank you very much for your help.”
- R v KR– Represented KA who was involved in what was described by the police at the time as the largest ever conspiracy involving cloned credit cards.
- R v DA – Money laundering case involving the laundering of £137 million through two London based bureau de changes. The evidence against our client and his co-defendants consisted of evidence the bureaus were ordering substantial quantities of €500 and $100 notes. Further that known drug dealers were visiting the bureaus on a frequent basis. Our client, whilst convicted, received a substantially lower sentence than his convicted co-defendants as the court acknowledged his limited role in what was an established money laundering operation. In the subsequent confiscation proceedings, the Crown contended the benefit figure should be £225,999 and stated the client has hidden assets of approximately £100,000. Grant Thornton were instructed to conduct an forensic analysis of our client’s finances. With their assistance and through detailed negotiations with the Crown, the final benefit figure was agreed to be less than £90,000 and the Crown conceded there were no hidden assets.
- R v DD – $20 million Ponzi scheme. Investigated by the Serious Fraud Office and Hampshire Police. It was stated that our client’s company, under the guise of an arbitrage gambling scheme, was in fact a Ponzi fraud. 650 investors were defrauded.
- R v TD – Confiscation proceedings where it was successfully argued that the client’s benefit for the offence of possession of 6 kg of cocaine was zero as the client was at most the custodian of the drugs for a period of 24 hours.
- R v RdS – Cash forfeiture proceedings involving the seizure by police of approximately £3.1million from our client’s business account. I initially represented the client upon his arrest on suspicion of money laundering. These proceedings were discontinued.
- R v O – Client admitted to possession of over 750,000 indecent images of children. A successful plea in mitigation advanced that the client had amassed this large volume of indecent material due to a compulsive addiction to collecting, which resulted in the court departing from the sentencing guidelines and imposing a suspended sentence of imprisonment. The client was made subject to a Sexual Offences Prevention Order. The terms of the order were subsequently successfully challenged after police attempted to install monitoring software on our client’s computers.
- R v W – Client pleaded guilty to possessing indecent images of children and extreme pornography. Successfully argued before the Court of Appeal that sentencing judge had used the incorrect starting point when considering sentence in light of the number and grading of the indecent images found.
- R v DD – Client admitted possession of approximately 20,000 indecent images of children. Expert evidence was obtained which successfully challenged the police officer’s grading of the images. In addition, expert medical evidence obtained which indicated the client’s viewing of images stemmed from the childhood abuse he had suffered. The evidence obtained persuaded the court to depart from the sentencing guidelines to impose a suspended sentence of imprisonment.
- R v RA – Large number of indecent images of children found on a password protected work computer belonging to our client. The Crown’s case was that only our client had access to the computer and therefore only our client could have been responsible for the images being present. Careful analysis of the prosecution expert’s evidence and obtaining numerous defence expert reports highlighted significant flaws in the Crown’s case which resulted in the Crown offering no evidence against our client part way through the trial.
- R v RI – Represented the client charged with rape who was unfit to stand trial due to serious mental health issues. The Complainant had no recollection of the incident and the client was charged based on DNA evidence. Expert evidence was obtained which indicated the presence of DNA from at least four other males and which more importantly, questioned the accuracy of the Crown’s DNA evidence. Client acquitted.
- R V Miah  Southwark Crown Court
- R v DY – presently representing DY who is before the courts for numerous counts involving child sex offences.
- R v AS – Client accused of false imprisonment and rape. Investigative work early in the case identified CCTV cameras which may have recorded part of the alleged incident. The CCTV camera owners were requested to retain the footage, which was subsequently obtained despite attempts by police to prevent its release. The footage obtained was forensically enhanced. The enhanced footage significantly weakened the prosecution case resulting in the Crown discontinuing proceedings.
- R v JM – Irish travelling family accused of a multi-million pound conspiracy to handle stolen goods. Case against all Defendants discontinued after an investigative analysis of the papers revealed the Crown had destroyed crucial evidence.
- R v OA– Represented a defendant who was part of a group who assisted the illegal entry into the UK of hundreds of individuals through the use of fraudulent documents.
Membership & Appointments
- The London Criminal Courts Solicitors’ Association
In my spare time I am an avid reader of science fiction.