Michele Stuart-Lofthouse

Call 2001

Principal Areas of Work

• Criminal Law

Practice Summary

Michele has considerable experience of dealing with serious sexual offences including child prostitution and child cruelty, serious violence, firearms and large-scale conspiracies.

She has dealt with numerous cases involving vulnerable child and adult witnesses. She has been instructed in complex confiscation proceedings and has been a led junior in challenging, ‘paper heavy’ cases including murder and conspiracies involving fraud, theft and drugs.

Her Court Martial practice has included representing members of the armed forces overseas. She is known for her hardworking approach and approachable manner.

Qualifications & Appointments

• 2001 Call, Lincoln’s Inn
• Masters by Research in Housing and Human Rights Law, Leeds University
• Postgraduate Diploma in Law (CPE), Nottingham Law School

Memberships

• Lincoln’s Inn
• North Eastern Circuit
• Criminal Bar Association

Appointments

• Level 4 Prosecutor and a member of the Specialist Rape Panel.
• Mentor at the University of Law in Leeds, the University of Leeds and Hull University.
• Pupil Supervisor and Head of Pupillage.
• Legal 500 (2021)

Languages

• Fluent French

Cases

Court Martial

• Germany Military Court Centre, Sennelager. Accused charged with offences of causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent. Acquitted following a successful submission of no case to answer.
• British Forces Germany Military Court Centre, Sennelager – Multi-handed case. Soldier accused of affray.
• Catterick Court Martial Centre – Soldier charged with offences of being absent without leave.
• Catterick Court Martial Centre – Soldier charged with numerous offences of making indecent photographs of a child.

General Crime

Prosecution

• R -v- KC & others. Grimsby. Convicted of kidnapping, arson, robbery and possession of a prohibited weapon. Substantial mobile phone and cell site analysis involved.
• R -v- AK & SB. Leeds. Led by Simon Kealey QC. AK charged with murder and SB with assisting an offender. The case involved anonymity, expert analyses of extensive mobile phone evidence, cell site, close circuit television footage and blood spatter.
• R -v- JD & others. Leeds. Multi-handed prosecution with lead Junior Counsel Tom Storey concerning conspiracies to commit fraud by false representation and to produce cannabis.
• R -v- IB & others unknown. Hull. Conspiracy to rob and having a firearm with intent involving numerous complainants.
• R -v- SE. Hull. Historical sexual abuse case involving a range of sexual offences and multiple complainants, one being a previous partner, the remaining complainants’ being familial. The defendant was found dangerous and sentenced to 20 years’ imprisonment.
• R -v- JC. Hull. Defendant charged with grooming, sexual activity and abduction of a young male child. The case involved substantial Facebook and mobile phone attribution and analysis as the defendant had used false accounts to pursue the child. Defendant convicted of the grooming and two counts of abducting the child.
• R v AM. Grimsby. Defendant convicted of various historical sexual offences including rape and anal penetration upon two young males, having used online chat rooms to initially engage with them. Various legal arguments including exclusion of mobile telephone evidence and an alleged breach of ACPO guidelines in the handling of computer evidence successfully opposed.
• R -v- HU. Grimsby. The defendant gave sworn evidence in family court proceedings after providing a statement to the police during an earlier investigation into the death of his previous partner’s young son. Expert as to memory loss relied upon at the time evidence was given in the family proceedings. Defendant convicted of perjury after successfully opposing the admissibility of the expert report.
• R -v- TI & others. Bradford. Multi-handed confiscation proceedings following conviction for involvement in a large scale importation of Class A drugs. The case involved a substantial paper trail, cross examination of a forensic accountant and legal argument as to an implied trust in the ownership of property assets.

Defence

• R -v- PW. Grimsby. Vulnerable defendant charged with multiple child sex offences following his arrest as a result of on-line vigilante activity.
• R -v- PLB. Grimsby. Cruelty to a child. Excessive chastisement of and failure to seek medical assistance for partner’s 6 years old child.
• R -v- KK. Grimsby. Allegations of rape and assault by penetration following internet dating. Defendant acquitted.
• R -v- DH. Grimsby. Defendant with significant learning disability charged with multiple allegations of sexual activity with a 14 years old boy.
• R -v- SHR. Grimsby. Various charges of rape, sexual assault, violence and intimidation of a partner. The case involved extensive forensic telephone analysis; text messages and Facebook, and detailed cross examination of the complainant on evidence given in the original trial. Defendant acquitted.
• R -v- FH & others. Hull. Successful legal argument achieving severance from an indictment alleging various sexual offences and arranging child prostitution.

Testimonials

‘Michele (Stuart-Lofthouse) is an extremely approachable advocate, and she provides a high-quality level of client care. Very good in cross-examination.’ – Legal 500