Ranked in The Legal 500 (2024) for Crime.
Glenn Parsons has a predominantly criminal practice. He defends or prosecutes in serious multi-defendant cases, including murder, rape, armed robbery and fraud. Glenn has both prosecuted and defended in sex cases that were subject to the s.28 pre-recorded cross- examination procedures which were trialed at Leeds Crown court and which will now be rolled out nationwide. He is therefore very experienced in the principles and procedures that apply and in particular, to formulating questioning in line with the protocols. He is also experienced in defending or prosecuting in proceeds of crime proceedings.
“Glenn quickly establishes a good relationship with clients. His advocacy in front of a jury is a sight to see and powerfully persuasive.” – The Legal 500 (2024)
“A sound and solid practitioner who has the ability to be empathetic but also robust when it is required.” – The Legal 500 (2023)
“He has a remarkable ability to digest voluminous amounts of evidence with a precise eye for detail. He also possesses a fantastic ability to command the respect of the court.“ – The Legal 500 (2022)
“Brilliant in court on his feet, he is a tremendous advocate with jury appeal.” – The Legal 500 (2021)
“Active in multi-handed cases, predominantly for the defence.” – The Legal 500 (2020)
“Highly recommended for multi-defendant criminal cases.” – The Legal 500 (2019)
“Astute and imperturbable, with brilliant client-care skills.” – The Legal 500 (2017)
- R v Goodhall and others- Murder Trial – Led Junior defending, Byron Goodhall, one of 5 men tried for 8 weeks at Manchester Crown Square, for offences that arose when 2 rival groups from Huddersfield clashed at the Manchester Caribbean Carnival in August 2022. It was the prosecution case that this was gang warfare and that on the night in question, Goodhall and at least 4 other men, some armed with bladed weapons, travelled from Huddersfield to Manchester where they were confronted by at least 4 other men from Huddersfield, some carrying firearms. This group shot live ammunition at Goodhall’s group and members of that group including Goodhall were alleged to have chased down one of the rival gang members, Javell Morgan, who was stabbed through the back with a machete and died at the scene. 2 members of Goodhall’s group were convicted of Murder and in a separate trial, members of the opposing group were convicted of charges of Attempted murder and firearms offences. The case required the detailed analysis of many hours of street CCTV footage together with a comprehensive understanding of the supreme court case of R v Jogee  UKSC 8 concerning the principles of ‘joint-enterprise’ . It was also successfully argued, following consideration of the leading case of R v Heslop and Others  2 Cr. App. R.20, that the evidence of gang affiliation, which the prosecution applied to put before the jury, was inadmissible. For media coverage click here
- R v – J-R – Representing 1 of 6 defendants tried at Leeds Crown Court in one of the first cases of its kind. All the defendants were members of ‘Predator Exposure’ or ‘Net Justice’, internet based groups that were dedicated to exposing online paedophiles. Members of the groups posing as under-age children would be targeted by online groomers and child sex-offenders. The groups would then record the online chat and confront the perpetrators in person, in what they termed as ‘stings’ either at their homes or in public places, streaming the event live on Facebook while detaining the suspects until the police arrived. West Yorkshire police brought proceedings against the groups on the basis that these detentions were unnecessary and were unlawful and therefore amounted to offences of False Imprisonment and Assault. Each defendant relied on their rights to make citizens arrests pursuant to s.24A of PACE 1984, on the basis that the police had failed to take action in the past when alerted to the illegal online activity of the offenders and therefore, the groups had no choice but to put the suspects under arrest themselves in order to force the police to act. The jury took 8 hours to acquit all the defendants following an 8 day trial. For media coverage, please click here
- R v Nicholas Gill – Led junior – successfully prosecuted 21 year old Nicholas Gill at Bradford Crown Court, for the murder of a 58 year old man as he returned home from a night out. The prosecution alleged that Gill had seen that Paul Bell was slightly unsteady on his feet as he entered an archway just yards from his home at 9pm on 30th September 2018. Gill approached him and attempted to rob him at knife-point however, Mr Bell refused to hand over any money and was then attacked and knocked to the ground suffering head fractures and a bleed on his brain. Matters were complicated by the fact that Mr Bell told passersby when found in the street, that he had simply fallen over after a man had tried to rob him with a knife. Thereafter, Mr Bell fell into a coma and died 54 days later. Gill denied all the charges and stated that Bell had attacked him with bottle. However, detailed expert blood and pathology evidence was adduced by the crown to link Gill to the scene, the assaults and the murder. Gill was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years. For media coverage, please click here.
- R v JC and Others (Operation Fencestoke) – Defending 1 of 11 defendants charged in connection with an organised crime group that were responsible for large-scale conspiracies to distribute Cannabis and Cocaine across the country and who also conspired to launder the proceeds. Over £300,000 worth of Class A drugs and £400,000 in cash were seized during a lengthy police surveillance operation which also uncovered 2 substantial Cannabis factories. The prosecution also relied on cell-site and phone co-location evidence to plot the movements of the conspirators. The case against JC was that he was a courier who was allegedly seen by surveillance officers driving a red Transit van later found to contain £68,000 worth of almost pure Cocaine, across Leeds. Officers tried to intercept the drugs in transit however, the van was driven dangerously in order to evade capture and was later found abandoned but with the drugs still in situ. JC was the only defendant to be acquitted of all charges, following a 5 week trial at Leeds Crown court. Sentences ranging from 15-20 years were handed down to the main players.
- R v M & M – defending a mother who was tried along with her husband in respect of allegations of causing Grievous Bodily Harm to their neonatal twins, who were 12 weeks old at the time. 1 twin had fractures to the ribs, a lacerated liver and injuries to the skin in the mouth. The other twin had fractures to the ankle, long bone of the leg and both wrists. The case involved cross-examining a number of pediatricians and other medical experts who were relied on by the crown to refute suggestions that the injuries were genetic or caused by accident or illness. The mother was acquitted of s.18 and s.20 but was convicted of Child Cruelty along with her husband, following a 3 weeks trial at Leeds Crown Court.
- R v H– concerned an allegation of rape against a student at Pontefract College, who it was alleged had raped a fellow student, in her own home. The complainant alleged that the act occurred during a free period when she and the defendant had gone from college to her house in order to pick up the defendant’s hoodie. The complainant further alleged that once at the house, she became heavily intoxicated and that the defendant had taken advantage of her. The defendant denied that anything sexual had occurred, despite the presence of his DNA in her underwear ,which he claimed was from a previous consensual sexual encounter, 2 weeks before the incident now alleged. The case therefore relied heavily on the various interpretations of the forensic evidence and required detailed cross-examination of the prosecution medical and forensic experts.
- R v M – Successfully defended a father accused of a campaign of rape against his daughter that was alleged to have taken place in Ghana, Italy, London and Leeds over a 6 year period. The defendant faced 11 specimen and specific counts and was tried over 3 weeks at Leeds Crown Court, in a case that was conducted entirely through interpreters in the defendant’s native language of Twi and was alleged to involve voodoo curses and forced abortions. Video-links were arranged by the defence to allow defence witnesses to give evidence from the United States and Accra in Ghana. The jury deliberated for nearly 9 hours and the defendant was acquitted of all charges.
- R v Rewcroft– Led Junior successfully defending a father charged with the murder of his daughter’s boyfriend. It was the prosecution case that the defendant had attended at the deceased home address armed with a knife and attacked him, causing 56 stab wounds, from which he later died. The prosecution alleged that this was a premeditated attack that was borne out of revenge. It was the defence case that the deceased was both drunk and aggressive and that the defendant had tried to calm him down, whereupon the deceased attacked the defendant and the defendant lost his self control. The defendant was acquitted of murder and convicted of manslaughter, by a majority.
- R v S – Successfully defended a man charged with Rape, Attempted Rape and the Sexual Assault of a lone female in the Queens Gardens area of Hull. The case involved the detailed analysis of CCTV footage from local nightclubs and Hull City Council street cameras. The defendant was acquitted of all charges.
- R v B – Successfully defended a man charged with counts of Sexual Assault on a lone female in Scarborough. The case involved the detailed analysis of CCTV footage from local public houses and Scarborough Council street cameras. The defendant was acquitted of all charges
- R v CB – Counsel defended and mitigated in a case of causing Death by Careless Driving Whilst Unfit through Drink or Drugs. The defendant pleaded Guilty to causing the death of his close friend who was the passenger in his car that crashed as the defendant drove them home from a music festival. The case was notable because the defendant’s toxicology readings were amongst the highest ever recorded in the United Kingdom. The case involved the analysis and understanding of toxicology and post mortem records. Counsel mitigated on behalf of the defendant and obtained a jail sentence reduced to 2 years custody.
- R v Blair Carpenter and Others – Prosecuting 9 defendants all charged with violent disorder and some further charged with s.18 wounding, arising from a large-scale disturbance which took place on the streets of Bradford city centre.
- R v Webb, Richards and Others – Junior counsel for 1 of 7 defendants tried for the murder of 4 people in a house fire in Leicester. The case was so notorious that it could not be tried at Leicester Crown Court and had to be moved to Nottingham.
- R v Smith and Others – Representing a client in a murder trial at Cambridge Crown Court where the defendant was charged with assisting an offender following the murder of an elderly man by the defendant’s son and nephew in a house burglary that went wrong. The investigation received substantial media publicity and was the subject of a full reconstruction on the BBC Crimewatch programme.
- R v Bozorgi – Representing a defendant charged with importing Class-A drugs into the UK form Iran. The defendant was Iranian by birth and would visit the country regularly, sometimes sending cars from the UK to Iran and sometimes importing cars into the UK from Iran. A convertible car, stopped by police at Dover having been imported from Iran, was found to contain £40,000 worth of heroin.
- R v Beard – Representing one of 6 men charged with conspiracy to supply Class-A drugs on the streets of York.
- R v Garland – Defending a man charged with the stranger-rape of a victim on the towpath of the Leeds-Liverpool canal.
- R v Coates – Defending a client tried for assisting an offender along with 2 other defendants charged with murder. The prosecution alleged that the client washed the blood off the clothing of her ex-partner, who was one of the 2 co-defendants charged with murder.
Contact Glenn’s clerks
Glenn Parsons will undertake all types of proceeds-of-crime work. He also has experience of prosecution work for the General Medical Council (GMC).
- R v Marks, NE and PS – Norwich Crown Court – Representing NE, one of 2 motorway maintenance men who were charged with Causing Death by Dangerous Driving and Death by Careless Driving, together with aiding and abetting counts, following a collision on the 26th February 2019. It was the prosecution case that the defendants had been required by their employers to collect litter from the side of the southbound carriageway of the A11 Attleborough, just outside Norwich and that both defendants had parked their works vehicles in tandem, partially in lane 1 of a dual carriageway, instead of pulling them fully onto the grass verge, thereby causing an obvious obstruction to other road users. Thereafter, an 18-ton Renault lorry being driven by the first defendant, Darren Marks, failed to notice that the defendants’ vehicles had stopped partially in lane 1. Marks drove into the back of the rear van, which had been left in situ by NE. The impact killed Mr Mark’s passenger. The Crown alleged that the parking of the vehicles so that they encroached into a live carriage was ‘dangerous’ and that in doing so, NE and PS were acting against the specific instructions of their employers.The case for NE and PS relied in part on evidence from an expert collision investigator, in order to prove that Mr Marks had failed to see the vehicles from nearly a third of a mile away because of his own gross inattention when behind the wheel. Telematics from Mark’s lorry showed that he had been driving at 56 mph, on cruise control and that he had only braked, 1/2 second before the collision occurred, proving that he had not seen the maintenance vehicles until he had hit them. In addition, following a full investigation by the Health and Safety Executive, It was further the defence case that the employer’s guidance had been ambiguous and that in fact, the defendants were performing the task in line with how they had been trained although they had been labouring under an unsafe system of work. Mr Marks pleaded guilty to Causing Death by Careless Driving, before the trial started. The jury acquitted both NE and PS of all charges, following a 2 week trial.
- R v Gahr – Instructed on behalf of Her Majesty’s Customs and Excise to prosecute Sebastian Gahr, who was a 41 year old Belgium lorry driver, charged with smuggling 5.2 million cigarettes into the United Kingdom. It was estimated that the duty that would have been evaded, had he been successful, was in excess £1.3m. However, UK Border Force Officers stopped the lorry as it entered the St George Docks, Hull, having crossed from the Euro-Port at Rotterdam, on the morning of 13/6/18. Gahr claimed to be carrying soil and gardening equipment bound for Liverpool, however officers suspicions were raised by Gahr’s nervous disposition and upon further investigation, pallets of contraband cigarettes found concealed behind the bags of soil. Gahr claimed to have been unaware of the presence of the cigarettes and stated that he had picked the wagon up at short notice in layby near his home in Kinrooi, Belgium, after another driver had fallen ill. However, investigations in both the UK and Belgium, confirmed that Gahr had been a party to securing the hire of the truck and trailer. In addition, detailed analysis of his mobile phone cell site and sat nav downloads further undermined Gahr’s account. Sebastian Gahr was convicted by unanimous verdict of the jury and sentenced to 4 1/2 years custody.
- R v Francis and Loveridge- Successfully prosecuted 2 defendants involved in a Conspiracy to Defraud concerning the targeting of elderly and infirm victims. The defendants purported to run various roofing and home maintenance businesses and they would approach elderly and vulnerable victims on the pretext that urgent work needed to be done on their roofs and driveways. In many cases the work was not undertaken at all, while in other cases the work was done to such a poor standard that it was in fact worthless. In most of the cases the victims were grossly overcharged and some paid money and the defendants returned demanding further additional payments. The value of the Frauds was in excess of £20,000. Prison sentences of 18 months and 3 years were passed and compensation and costs were also ordered.
- R v AXL1 Ltd Trading as Alexander Snee – The defendant company were trading in used cars. A successful prosecution was brought by City of York Trading Standards following numerous complaints by customers. Convictions were secured by Mr Parsons in relation to Breach of a Safety Notice and an offence pursuant to regulation 8 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Contract Terms regulations 2008. The defendant company were fined £2000 and full compensation was awarded to the aggrieved consumers.
- R v Wild and Holly – Successfully prosecuted 2 fraudsters who were convicted following a 3 week trial at Leeds Crown Court. The prosecution was brought and funded by City of York Trading standards following an extensive investigation into the York Based Estate-Management company Yorkshire Assets Protection (YAP). Over 30 elderly and vulnerable witnesses were called to give evidence concerning the products that they were sold by YAP which included wills, Lasting Powers of Attorney and Property Trusts, the latter being sold on the basis that they would shield the purchaser from local authority care costs should the purchaser be taken into care. However, many of the products were worthless or were simply not provided. The jury convicted both the defendants of running a fraudulent company and of Consumer Trading offences. One defendant was also convicted of making fraudulent statements about the law and of making false claims that he was a solicitor.
- R v White and Montgomery – Successfully prosecuted 2 defendants, in a case brought by City of York Trading Standards pursuant to Regulation 3, 8 and 13 of the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading, Regulations 2008. The defendants were trading under the name of Ripon Building Specialists. They were were contracted by the lady complainant, who had impaired vision and was registered disabled, to build an extension at her home. The complainant paid over £21,000 to the defendants however, the extension they constructed, was so poorly built, defective and unsafe that the local authority issued not 1 but 2 Building Contravention Notices. The complainant’s attempt to put right the numerous defects, or recover her money, were met with threats and abuse from the defendants. Following conviction £10,000 was paid back to the complainant by the defendants and a full compensation order of £13,870 was made in her favour. The defendants received suspended sentences of 13 months and 10 months respectively.
- R v Quinn and Quinn – Prosecuting on behalf of Durham Trading Standards Authority. Convictions obtained after a trial for Fraudulent Trading and Tax Evasion in relation to 2 bothers Ross and Luke Quinn who ran online retail businesses over a 2 year period which were run fraudulently. The Frauds involved the setting up of internet businesses selling such things as hot-tubs, ride on lawnmowers and Tub furniture. The goods were advertised online, often at very low prices. Payments were made by unsuspecting shoppers, either online or by bank transfer, followed by the non-delivery of the purchased goods. All subsequent requests for refunds were ignored and eventually the company in question would be go into liquidation and either Ross or Luke Quinn would then set up a new online retail businesses, with different products, but with the same patterns of frauds resulting. In total the frauds netted the brothers in excess of £600,000.00. In addition, the brothers failed to pay any tax and were convicted of tax evasion to the amount of £400,000.00. Luke Quinn was sentenced to a total of 4 years custody and was disqualified from being a Company Direction for 9 years. Ross Quinn was sentenced to a total of 6 ½ years custody and was disqualified from being a Company Director for 13yrs 3 months. The case involved the in-depth knowledge of Fraud legislation, Financial Accounting and Tax Law.