Aleister Adamson

Barrister

Aleister Adamson is a criminal defence advocate with a public law background, instructed in a wide range of serious and complex criminal matters, including fraud, serious violence, drugs, public order, and sexual offences.

Summary

Aleister is recognised for his meticulous preparation and unyielding approach to defending his clients’ interests. From the earliest stages of proceedings, he pursues every viable line of defence with care and precision. He has secured numerous successful outcomes through submissions of no case to answer, abuse of process arguments, and robust challenges to the admissibility of evidence. His practice frequently involves cases in which exacting scrutiny of the prosecution evidence and strategically deployed legal argument are decisive.

Drawing on a professional background advocating for some of the most disadvantaged in society, Aleister brings a tenacious and disciplined approach to advancing his clients’ interests. He has particular experience representing clients with complex needs, including those who are neurodivergent or face challenging personal circumstances. He is adept at identifying procedural and evidential failings in police investigations and ensuring that such deficiencies are brought squarely before the court and rigorously tested.

Background

Before coming to the Bar, Aleister worked in public law, policy, and advisory roles focused on holding public authorities to account. As a senior legal adviser at Release, he provided free legal advice and representation to individuals in drug and alcohol treatment. He managed a substantial caseload spanning housing, debt management, and social security appeals, frequently securing significant backdated awards following unlawful or unfair decision-making. Alongside his casework, he led the organisation’s policy responses to proposed legislative and policing reforms, including the provision of evidence to Parliamentary committees.

He later worked as a legal adviser at the Lewisham Refugee and Migrant Network, supporting migrants and refugees with housing, welfare benefits, and subsistence claims, often in the context of multiple and overlapping needs.

Prior to this, he worked in the civil department at Hickman & Rose, where he assisted on the Grenfell Tower Inquiry and on actions against the police and other public bodies.

Education

Bar Professional Training Course, BPP Holborn (2021)
LLM in Human Rights Law, University of Nottingham (2017)
LLB (Hons) Law with New Zealand Law, University of Nottingham (2014)

Awards

Inner Temple Exhibition Scholarship
Inner Temple Duke of Edinburgh Award

Memberships

The Honourable Society of the Inner Temple

R v YZ: Represented a client of good character at trial charged with threats to kill, witness intimidation and harassment causing fear of violence. Following Aleister’s representations on day one of trial, the prosecution decided to offer no evidence. Aleister’s client, who had been in custody for a number of months, was acquitted and released.
R v SA: Appeared in a food safety regulations case which attracted national media coverage after fish were found to have been stored in a bathtub adjacent to the toilet in his client’s premises. The case concluded with a suspended sentence for Aleister’s client and a substantial reduction in the £23,000 costs sought by the prosecution. Read more here.
R v A: Proceedings effectively discontinued following an abuse of process challenge where the prosecution had previously given an unequivocal undertaking that the charge would not be pursued to trial. Following the defence application, the CPS allowed the matter to lie on the file.
R v R: Three-day Crown Court trial for possession with intent to supply Class A drugs. Following cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, Aleister successfully submitted that the evidence was insufficient to go before the jury. The submission of no case to answer was upheld and the defendant was acquitted.
R v D: Youth trial for section 18 GBH before a lay bench. Aleister secured an acquittal following a submission of no case to answer at the close of the prosecution case. The defendant had previously offered a plea to the lesser offence of unlawful wounding and retained full credit for that plea.
R v F: Defendant acquitted of stalking involving allegations of repeated contact with the complainant and criminal damage to her workplace. Through cross-examination the prosecution case was significantly undermined, and by the conclusion of her evidence the complainant no longer sought a restraining order.
R v M: Youth charged with possession of an offensive weapon in private. The defence instructed expert evidence establishing that the item did not meet the statutory definition. Following service of the report and an application under section 78 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 to exclude any suggestion to the contrary, the prosecution offered no evidence.
R v L, L and M: Acting for D1 in a large-scale altercation between members of the public and licensed security staff. Aleister secured his client’s acquittal at half-time on the basis that the identification evidence was too weak to safely support a conviction.
R v K: Youth trial for failing to provide a specimen of breath. Multiple failures to comply with PACE Code C were identified in the detention and questioning of a vulnerable suspect with ADHD and autism. The court upheld a submission of no case to answer and the defendant was acquitted.
R v B: Represented a defendant who pleaded guilty to section 20 GBH and further offences including assault on an emergency worker and having a dog dangerously out of control, while subject to a suspended sentence. Following detailed mitigation addressing the client’s personal circumstances and risk factors, the court imposed a suspended sentence.
R v N: Represented a defendant charged with causing serious injury by dangerous driving who had previously been deemed unfit to stand trial. Following a later finding of fitness and a guilty plea, Aleister’s mitigation resulted in the court imposing a conditional discharge.