Carolina Guiloff

Barrister

Carolina is ranked as a leading individual in Legal 500, Crime.

In a nutshell: Criminal Defence specialist, highly capable, versatile senior junior at the top of her game.

What she does: Carolina is the professional and lay client’s first choice for instruction as leading counsel in the most serious and organised crime cases, including major fraud, drugs importations, human trafficking, serious violence, multi-complainant rape cases. Carolina also advises on private appeals, and has represented successful appellants in relation to both conviction and sentence.

How she does it: Carolina combines expertise in law and jurisprudence, incisive legal and factual analysis, with a profound understanding of human nature. This rare mix enables her to adapt to a wide breadth of criminal cases, to identify and advance legal arguments effectively, and cross-examine experts, officers and lay witnesses successfully. It is more often than not a winning combination, where results are achieved against the odds.

She is known for her skilled and fearless advocacy, engaging manner, highly analytical mind, and sound tactical judgment grounded in years of experience.

She is shamelessly and helplessly passionate about what she does, fiercely committed, and works tirelessly for the people she has the privilege of representing, understanding that with each case she is entrusted with someone’s future, and that the consequences for defendants facing serious charges go far beyond the client in front of her.

Professional and lay clients appreciate her genuine nature, straight-talking which puts them at ease, and deservedly and rapidly builds trust.

Her considerable years of experience have not dampened her enthusiasm for the task in hand.

Evidence: The key question is does she deliver? Her cv and testimonials provide the answer.

Shortlisted as Crime and Extradition Junior of the Year in 2022.

Recent Testimonials

“Commanding and authoritative on her feet. A compelling and fearless advocate.” Legal 500 2026, Crime
"She has great court presence and in multi-handed cases is able to ensure that the defence of her client is advanced strongly." Legal 500 2025, Crime
"Carolina is involved in the preparation of a case from the very beginning and considers each detail to ensure that all preparation that can be undertaken is undertaken." Legal 500 2025, Crime
"Her academic ability as a lawyer is also of an extremely high level." Legal 500 2024, Crime
"Clients absolutely love her because she advocates for them tenaciously and without fear." Legal 500 2024, Crime
"Carolina is ferocious in court with a combative style." Legal 500 2024, Crime
"A tenacious barrister who will fight for her clients tooth and nail." Legal 500 2023, Crime
"Carolina is hard-working and an excellent advocate." Legal 500 2022, Crime
"A real fighter in court. Carolina does not back down, even in the face of firm questioning from the bench." Legal 500 2021
"She has a calm and reassuring bed-side manner that immediately puts clients at ease." Legal 500 2021
"Dedicated to putting her client’s defence firmly in the minds of the jury." Legal 500 2020
"She will fight for her clients as if she is fighting for her own family." Legal 500 2018
"A real life Martha Costello, she bristles with crusading zeal, tactical nouse and a bedside manner puts all clients at ease." Legal 500

Professional Memberships

Criminal Bar Association
Howard League Association for Penal Reform
The Honourable Society of Middle Temple
Women in Criminal Law

Languages

Fluent in Spanish and French, conversational Portuguese and Italian.

Homicide and Serious Violence

R v A: Junior Alone, attempted murder, 2024. Close scrutiny of CCTV and persistent disclosure requests proved that the D was telling the truth when he said he hadn’t taken the weapon to the mosque- the complainant had. Acquitted. Press Link.
R v A: Junior alone, attempted murder [plea] 2023. Defendant googled “how to kill instantly with a knife” before taking a knife to the restaurant his ex-worked at and stabbing her, on CCTV. A multiplicity of mental health issues arose. Press Link.
R v G: Led, conspiracy to murder, 2024. Complex multi-handed Encrochat involving cross-examination of expert in digital forensics regarding the reliability of probe evidence, and cell site evidence. Acquitted. Press Link.
R v S: Junior alone, attempted murder, 2023. Attempt murder. Defendant accused of gang violence related knife crime in incident caught on mobile camera. D was seen to wield a large knife and poles against numerous males. Cross-examination of multiple witnesses. Legal argument on character and inconsistent defence statement. Acquittal on all counts: attempt murder, s18 GBH and s20.
R v M: Junior Alone, attempted murder, 2023. Defendant accused of shooting in broad daylight in with another unidentified male. Secured unanimous acquittal in case involving evidence in the form of covert prison recordings, phone evidence, cell site, DNA, gait analysis, alibi. Acquitted
R v A: Junior Alone, attempted murder 2023. Defendant accused of attempted murder and dangerous driving arising out of alleged gang violence involving running over victim, and driving with him underneath the vehicle for some distance, causing life changing injuries. Case involved XX of road traffic experts and forensic analysis of CCTV. Acquittal.
R v L: Led junior, murder, 2023. Press Link.
R v S: Junior alone- perverting the course of justice, 2022. D accused of assisting an offender in a well-publicised multi-handed gang attempted murder in which had to navigate CCTV, advance various legal arguments and combat extensive prejudice by virtue of our romantic connection to a gang leader who was allegedly involved in multiple shootings. Acquitted. Press Link.
R v K: Junior Alone, attempted murder, 2022. Attempted murder, shooting - in multi-handed shooting involving CCTV, expert phone, cell site evidence and telematics expert and detailed exposition of the investigation. Acquitted.
R v W: Junior Alone, conspiracy to cause GBH, 2019. Transfer from Central Criminal Court The defendant was accused of conspiracy to cause GBH, and possession of a firearm with intent. He allegedly assisted a notorious London gang by being the driver in a ride-out [co-ds receiving sentences of 26 years at first instance, 23 on appeal.] Complexities of the case involved admissibility of both drill videos and numerous prison transcripts, and difficult tactical decisions. Counsel successfully argued the exclusion the drill videos and advanced the defence of duress. Press release relates all the co- defendants who where convicted. Sole D to be acquitted. Press Link 1. Press Link 2.
R v C: Lead counsel, attempted murder, 2019. Defendant was leading counsel for the defendant who faced a count of attempted murder [in this case, minimum term 25 years] and possession of a scaffold pole as well as several other lessor charges. The defendant was accused of a gruesome attack involving smashing in the skull of the victim in a crack den. The case required skilful cross-examination of numerous lay witnesses, and a mastery of CCTV and phone evidence. Acquitted.

Organised Crime

R v H: Lead counsel, kidnap, 2026. Defendant – first on indictment, aged 23, accused of kidnap following failure of a drugs courier [complainant] to complete delivery of drugs consignment. Complainant tortured, burnt and raped post kidnap [allegations against D2.] Nonetheless defence case was that complainant had told a series of lies against D1, and so sensitive and skilful cross-examination was required. Complex character arguments, intricate factual matrix and fact/document heavy case. Police failure to investigate social media necessitated extra-ordinary disclosure arguments. Acquitted.
R v C: Lead counsel, conspiracy to supply class A drugs, 2026. Sole D in the multi-handed trial who had to face 2 unrelated cases in 1 trial following a successful joinder application by the prosecution. The first case, linked to the other defendants, was a conspiracy to supply class A- an operation to supply cocaine in the South East. D was said to have acted on multiple occasions as a courier for a co-d who had pleaded guilty. D was also accused of perverting the course of justice- being involved in a clean-up operation following the shooting of the co-d in her home 2 years later. Successfully used the joinder to D’s advantage, relying on the phone evidence and CCTV from the linked case no. 2 to demonstrate lack of involvement in class A dealing. Sensitive handling of very vulnerable D. Exceptionally, avoided custody on the perverting. Acquitted of the major drugs conspiracy.
R v H: Lead counsel, conspiracy to supply class A drugs, 2025. Defendant acquitted of conspiracy to supply class A. Highly complex and voluminous Encrochat case with challenges to Encrochat data reliability, extensive cell site evidence, geo-data. Cross-examination of experts in highly technical areas. Numerous legal arguments covering s.8 disclosure, admissibility, rebuttal evidence. Acquitted.
R v P: Junior alone, blackmail, 2023. Counsel took the lead and had a pivotal role in this complex case involving covert recordings, evidence from HMRC regarding bankruptcy, cell site and phone evidence and extensive bad character used by and against the defendant [in particular his alleged links to the Krays, and the criminal underworld.] Acquittal.
R v D: Lead counsel, human trafficking, 2021. Multiple defendants and multiple witnesses many of whom were treated as vulnerable, giving evidence via an interpreter over a link in Romania. Defence case of collusion entailed significant analysis and cross-referencing of lengthy eye-witness accounts. Press Link.
R v AE: Violent disorder, Court of Appeal citation [2019] EWCA Crim 1734 [2019] 10 WLUK 473. Multi- faceted case involving a number of witnesses and different strands of expert evidence – telephone, cell-site, CCTV. AE was acquitted of one of the violent disorders and convicted of the other. Counsel successfully appealed and successfully opposed prosecution’s application to order a re-trial.
R v W: Junior Alone, 2019. Represented young women accused of being lieutenant to brothel manager who ran a network of brothels across the UK, and of money laundering. Hundreds of thousands of pages of telephone evidence analysed and condensed into schedules, and effective marshalling of financial evidence. Acquitted. Press Link.
R v H: CoA ref: [2019] EWCA Crim 281 (19 February 2019). This case concerned an alleged conspiracy to facilitate the unlawful immigration of the Syrian wife of a co-defendant. The prosecution’s application to join and try an absent co-defendant who had advanced duress in interview threw up novel, complex and challenging legal arguments. Counsel led the arguments on behalf of all 3 appellants, successfully overturning the conviction.
R v I & Others: Lead counsel, 2018. The case received a significant amount of press attention due to failures by the prosecution in disclosure. Counsel was leading counsel representing the first defendant who was allegedly a member of the Romanian mafia, running a number of different brothels together with his family, and trafficking a woman from Greece to the UK via Romania for sex- work. An enormous volume of material [tens of thousands of pages] had to be mastered at the eleventh hour - comprising phone downloads, Facebook material, call data records, cell site, banking material. Cross-examination involved the cross-referencing from multiple sources. Following the complainant’s cross-examination the prosecution offered no further evidence. Acquitted. Press Link.

Serious Sexual Offences

R v A: Lead Counsel, 2025. Private instruction. D acquitted of all 24 counts [7 complainants alleging rape plus further “bad character” complainant over period of 14 years.] Complex case management - detailed legal and factual analysis in order to mount pre-trial arguments – applications to dismiss, and severance arguments involving bad character and cross admissibility. Successful applications re complainants’ previous sexual history were fundamental to a balanced picture being shown to jury. Contamination between witnesses was unearthed during the trial which led to successful applications for disclosure of phone records. Those, together with a successful application for disclosure of medical records, proved central to unprecedented acquittals. Press Link 1. Press Link 2.
R v M: Leading Counsel, 2025. Young defendant accused of multiple rapes and extreme violence against his partner. Strong advice led to D pleading to almost all of the violence on day 1 of trial thus minimising trauma for complainant and as far as possible the prejudice to D. Prosecution hostile witness application when prosecution unearthed prison telephone communication between complainant and defendant. Issues of admissibility and self-incrimination arose. Open rather than leading questions frequently asked in cross-examination to demonstrate that the complainant was not simply agreeing with the defence either out of fear or to help the defendant. Acquittals on all rape counts.
R v K: Junior Alone, 2022. Private instruction. Successful submission at close of prosecution case in indecent images case following analysis of voluminous phone evidence and tailored, effective cross-examination of phone expert. Acquitted.
R v L: Junior Alone, 2021. 84 year old D facing on an 11- count indictment involving historical allegations of sexual abuse and child cruelty against his 2 step-daughters, said to have occurred over a number of years, dating back to the '70s. Complicating factors were that recent complaint evidence had continued over a period of scores of years. The navigation and testing of evidence which spanned such a lengthy time period required expert and focused assessment on what mattered so as to keep the trial within manageable bounds. Successful exclusion of prejudicial character evidence from a recent complaint witness and the complainants' ABEs and editing of numerous witness statements avoided the need for the calling of many of recent complaint witnesses. Acquitted of all sexual abuse allegations.
R v B: Junior Alone, rape 2020. Counsel successfully represented a young boy of good character, accused of committing rape when he was 15 against another 15 year-old. Expert handling of a young witness and careful and thorough analysis and presentation of phone records. Acquittal.

Drugs and Firearms

R v M & Others: Counsel successfully represented the first defendant in this case where both D2 and D3 were cutting his throat in respect of both the firearms and drugs indictment. Complex bad character, and hearsay arguments were both made and resisted, and despite facing a cut-throat, data and cell-site evidence, observation evidence the defendant was found not guilty.
R v S & Others: Counsel successfully defended the second defendant accused of large scale class A trafficking involving volumes of phone evidence - data and cell-site, and observation evidence. Despite the defendant’s form for similar offending going before the jury acquitted him.
R v K & Others: Counsel represented the first defendant, mother of 2 boys in this large scale class A trafficking involving volumes of phone evidence-data and cell-site evidence; media coverage.
R v RH & Others: Acted for principal defendant in multi-million pound 'Columbian drug baron' case which received extensive media coverage. Police alleged that at the time of his interview he was the biggest cocaine dealer in the United Kingdom. Case involved covert and intrusive surveillance, extensive financial documentation relevant to criminal lifestyle and money laundering, and complex confiscation proceedings.
R v SB & Others: Instructed alone for one of the principal defendants in this multi-handed drugs supply conspiracy; notable as during the course of the surveillance operation and whilst under surveillance, one of the co-defendants was shot.
R v E & Others: Junior counsel in large-scale heroin importation involving covert surveillance; public interest immunity issues caused the case to collapse.

Human Trafficking

R v PW: Lead counsel. Defendant was accused of being the right-hand woman of the main defendant who ran a UK wide network of brothels. The defence involved a painstaking analysis of voluminous banking evidence and thousands of pages of phone download to create a schedule to counter the prosecution’s skewered banking and phone analysis, and to present to the jury a balanced picture of defendant’s activities during the 4 year period of the indictment, leading ultimately to the defendant’s acquittal. Press Link.
R v A & Others: Junior counsel. Organised facilitation of illegal immigration, involving the systematic entry of illegal immigrants over a period of weeks via aeroplane, dubbed “club-class” illegal immigration by the judge. Volumes of covert surveillance showed links to the notorious Turkish mafia, the “Baybasins.” Case raised major disclosure issues which were argued on appeal.

Dangerous Driving

R v SB: Counsel defended a respected professional in this death by dangerous driving case involving painstaking analysis of CCTV and expert reports, in which the defendant ultimately escaped a custodial sentence.
R v B: Defendant, a motorcyclist accused of causing serious injury by dangerous driving, ran over an eminent judge, the ex-president of the QBD. Following a very helpful defence expert report the prosecution accepted careless driving. However a Newton hearing was still necessary to deal with the issue of the extent of the carelessness. The defendant kept his licence.

R v K: Junior Alone, conspiracy to commit fraud by fraudulent representation, 2026. Effective use of the ACPO guidelines and the Forensic Regulator’s Code to demonstrate how the failure to adhere to rules could tangibly effect the reliability of evidence obtained from overseas.
R v B: Junior Alone, conspiracy to commit fraud by fraudulent representation, 2025, and possession of articles for use in fraud. The conspiracy arose out of Operation Dingo, an investigation into thousands of fraudulent transactions, amounting to over half a million pounds, involving TrainLine and Eurostar. Messages in Lingala between the defendant and 2 of the co-defendants implicated the defendant. Extensive analysis of, and cross referencing between the defendants’ many phones was required to unpick a tangled evidential web. Negotiations led to a plea solely on the lessor counts which enabled a successful argument to be advanced that the defendant should avoid a custodial sentence.
R v C: Junior Alone, money laundering, 2023. Successful submission at close of prosecution case on behalf of a young mother accused of PWTIS Class A 9.5 kilos and approximately £200k money laundering. Careful analysis of BWV and unused was used to optimal effect in cross -examination of OIC. Acquitted.
R v L: Junior Alone, money laundering, 2023. Instructed post-conviction to deal with the defendant who was alleged by the NCA to be a world-wide money launderer for OCGs. Substantial legal arguments on quantum in sentence opposing the prosecution approach on the basis, inter alia, that it went contrary to the way that they advanced the case at trial. Press Link.
R v S: Lead counsel, conspiracy to money launder, 2020. First on indictment, in a case arising out of Operation Surging, a conspiracy to money launder £25 million and involving multiple defendants, and multiple shell companies. Late disclosure by prosecution, necessitating numerous disclosure requests and fruitful s.8 applications. Successful opposition of bad character application. Despite cut-throat run by D2, secured acquittal. N.B. Press Link is for co-Ds in the linked follow-on trial, who unlike S, were not successful.
R v C: Junior Alone, conspiracy to money launder, 2021. This was a complex conspiracy worth the £1.25 million proceeds of an alleged cyber fraud against property tycoons, the Candy brothers. Careful XX of the central prosecution witness who had turned King’s Evidence, and of the officer in the case unearthing fundamental mistakes made by the police in their approach to the case. Acquitted.
R v S: Southwark CC. Leading counsel and first on the indictment in a multi-million pound money laundering, involving numerous companies. A cut-throat and difficult tactical decisions on admissibility were successfully navigated, ending in an acquittal on the main conspiracy count.
R v O’D: First on the indictment in this nationwide fraud against multiple vulnerable victims. Sensible advice meant that the defendant pleaded early– the majority involved went to trial and were convicted, others pleaded late. Consequently, the defendant received the most favourable sentence.
R v C: Leading Counsel was for the main defendant in this theft of nearly a million pounds worth of Sony play stations, stolen before they had been released for official sale. The defendant faced a strong circumstantial case involving call data, cell site, vehicle experts, Tachograph evidence and CCTV. Every aspect of the evidence was challenged, from the weighing in of the goods at the docks to the evidence of the vehicle.
R v ES: D was a mother who had pleaded guilty to a theft of £231,00 over an 8 month period from elderly vulnerable victim afflicted with Alzheimers, involving a breach of a high degree of trust; successfully secured a suspended sentence. Press Link.
R v F & Others: Leading counsel in multi-handed money laundering case. The defendant was involved in the administration and banking of a company which was the vehicle of a sophisticated boiler room fraud. The architects of the fraud had been members of her own family, tried and convicted in a previous trial - she was acquitted.
R v A & Others: Instructed in multi-handed complex conspiracy to defraud case involving mastery of multiple documents, phone evidence and voice identification evidence.
R v S: High value fraud stemming from the cloning of Lady Shakira Caine’s credit card and subsequent complex web of money laundering. Client pleaded guilty and avoided custody.
R v R & Others: Multi-handed high value money laundering case representing the head of the family accused of laundering the proceeds of his son’s drug dealing. This complex case involved anonymous witnesses giving evidence with modulated voices. Counsel led the challenge to expert evidence in mass spectrometry evidence and statistics. The defendant was acquitted of the most serious counts.
R v S & Another: Junior counsel in this multi-handed large-scale betting fraud with highly complex confiscation proceedings involving multiple overseas accounts, properties and trusts.
R v L & Others: VHCC - Multi-million pound diversion fraud involving importation of alcohol and tobacco, facilitated by dishonest customs officers; eleven defendants. Difficult tactical considerations arose. The defendant was the only one of the eleven to be linked directly to the imported goods; despite the fact that he did not give evidence and gave a no- comment interview, he was acquitted.
R v C & Others: Instructed alone for one of defendants said to be one of the organisers of this fraud, described by the police and media as the biggest passport and identity document fraud yet discovered.
R v M & Others: Multi-million pound “carousel” fraud involving evasion of duty on computer chips and telephones, facilitated by dishonest customs officers; acted for a “buffer” and money launderer. Case involved the analysis of tens of thousands of service of material following the “Wallbank protocol” and also disclosure arguments akin to those advanced in the London City Bond cases.
R v H & R: Instructed alone on sophisticated nation-wide fraud and money laundering case, facilitated by dishonest bank employees.
R v W & Others: Multi-million pound “carousel” fraud, acting for a “buffer” trader.
R v P & Others: Instructed alone on multi-million pound cigarette importation; successfully defended confiscation proceedings for £750,000