Rufus D'Cruz is an experienced junior who defends and prosecutes serious cases covering a wide area of criminal work. His practice covers a broad range of cases from Fraud, Money Laundering, Large-Scale Drugs cases to Sex, Murder and other heavy crime. His practice also extends to health and safety work and representing and advising individuals, companies and corporations in relation to corporate crime. He has been led regularly as well as appeared on his own in serious multi-handed cases. He is now increasingly instructed as a leader.
The extent to which he defends and prosecutes in serious cases has provided him with a more rounded experience and expertise in managing cases with voluminous papers and extensive unused material, analysing and organising complex facts, drafting and presenting complicated legal arguments, and dealing with difficult issues relating to disclosure, PII and sensitive material and Mutual Assistance and Letters of Request. He has acquired considerable experience both prosecuting and defending in handling a variety of witnesses from child witnesses and vulnerable witnesses, to senior police officers and defendants and expert witnesses and professional witnesses.
He has been led regularly over the years in serious cases in which he has appeared for the defence. In recent years he has been led by David Williams QC in a 4-week double-handed murder trial, involving father-and-son defendants (R v Yildiz & Yildiz, see below); in a complex, serious and organised people-smuggling case (R v Muhareem Garip and others, see below) and in an 8-week money laundering case in Leeds, part of a series of cases relating to the laundering of over £300 million out of the jurisdiction (R v Amer Ramzan and others, see below). He has also been led by John Lyons in an unusual soliciting to murder, involving a defendant on remand for fraud who solicited the murder of his co-defendant and by Stephen Harvey QC in a 9-handed drug importation case. He also appeared alone in a 3-month mutli-handed case prosecuted by Sir Derek Spencer QC, relating to offences of Importation of Endangered Species under the CITES regulations.
He has undertaken increasingly serious and complex cases for the prosecution, involving offences of Attempted Murder, Kidnapping, multi handed Armed Robbery, serious s.18 and Drugs Importation. More recently he has prosecuted cases involving investigations by the Special Crime Directorate. He prosecuted a complex 9-handed Conspiracy to Produce Cannabis, investigated by SCD 7 (Emerging Threats), in which he acted as a leader in two linked trials involving 4 cannabis factories, producing an annual turnover of over £1million, (See R v Popov and others). He also prosecuted a serious Conspiracy to Supply class A drugs in prison, relating to two defendants on remand for murder, that was investigated by SCD 1 (Murder Squad). He is currently instructed in a Conspiracy to Murder and a Housing Benefit/Money Laundering case in which he is acting as a leader.
He has acquired significant and exceptional experience in appellate work having acted in judicial reviews in the Divisional Court, in innumerable appeals in the Court of Appeal (R v Mohammed Aslam) and in the House of Lords (R v Weir see below).
Corporate
He is particularly adept at representing and advising corporate clients, for example in relation to Health and Safety offences such as maintaining the safety of employees and safe systems of work and breaches of the Construction (Design Management) Regulations 1994. He also advises on Money Laundering matters, such as production orders and special procedure material and on corporate fraud.
Russia
He has particular expertise and insight in representing and advising Russian based clients, having studied Russian at university and having lectured in Russia over the last decade. He brings to this work a unique combination of proficiency in the language, knowledge of the political and economic context and his experience in a broad range of criminal work. He is a member of the British-Russian Law Association.
Lecturing
He has lectured on proposals to reform the law of Corporate Manslaughter and on the creation of new Cartel offences in the Enterprise Act 2002.
Human Rights
He has developed a particular expertise in the human rights field. In 2001 he appeared in the House of Lords, led by Sir Derek Spencer QC in a leading case about the unlawful retention of DNA and the time limits for appeals. He has lectured on the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 for Liberty and in relation to the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006.
He served as an executive member of the Bar Human Rights Committee for 8 years, for whom he has carried out work in the states of the former Soviet Union, the United States and the Caribbean. The work was mainly focused on compatibility of English law, ECHR law and international human rights law with the domestic law of particular states. This was applied in trial observations, seminars and in, often high-profile, cases involving extradition and the concept of cruel and unusual punishment. He has experience in death-row work, having represented defendants in the Privy Council and the Inter American Court of Human Rights. He also served on the Board and the Council of Liberty for 5 years.
In 2006, he was part of a team of barristers who submitted an amicus brief on behalf of the Bar Human Rights Committee to the US Supreme Court in relation to the rights of detainees held at Guantánamo Bay Naval Base. In a landmark judgment on 29 June 2006, the US Supreme Court ruled that the attempt to oust the jurisdiction of the courts and the setting up of military tribunals was unlawful and in breach of both US federal law and international human rights law.
Television Work
He has worked as a legal consultant on a number of episodes of Judge John Deed and The Bill.
Languages
Russian – very proficient
French – proficient
Recent Cases of Note
R v Popov & others
20.3.07
This was a 9-handed Conspiracy to Produce Cannabis case in which Rufus D’Cruz was instructed as a leader. It was a complex investigation conducted by Special Crime Directorate 7 (emerging threats) into a series of cannabis factories with an annual turnover of £1million. The case required the analysis and calling of a wide spectrum of expert evidence including forensic scientists, telephone and computer analysts. Unusually in such cases, the financier and main organiser was arrested, tried and convicted and assets were seized. There were two trials lasting 4 and 6 weeks, at the conclusion of which four defendants were convicted, two pleaded and two were acquitted (one remained at large).
R v Yildiz
20.03.2007
This was a 4-week two-handed murder trial of a father and his 16-year-old son. The victim, a 41-year-old car mechanic, had been stabbed to death in broad daylight at his place of work. David Williams and Rufus D’Cruz acted for the father who spoke no English. The father was acquitted and the son convicted. Given the nature of the relationship between the two defendants and the number of child witnesses who had to be cross examined, the case called for delicate and difficult judgments.
Salim Ahmed Hamdan v Donald H. Rumsfeld et al.
29.06.06: Supreme Court of the United States
An amicus brief prepared by Rufus D’Cruz as part of a team of barristers on behalf of the Bar Human Rights Committee in support of the challenges to the lawfulness of the detention of suspects at Guatánamo Naval Base. In a landmark ruling, the US Supreme Court held that the setting up of military tribunals and the attempts to oust the jurisdiction and supervision of the civil courts thereby denying detainees fundamental rights, including the right of habeas corpus was in breach of US Federal Law and international human rights law.
The plaintiff in this case was Salim Ahmed Hamdan, a citizen of Yemen and a driver formerly employed to work on an agricultural project by Osama Bin Laden. Hamdan was captured by militia forces during the invasion of Afghanistan and turned over to the United States. Following his seizure, he was sent to Guantánamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. In July 2004, he was charged with Conspiracy to Commit Terrorism and the Bush administration made arrangements to try him before a military commission.
Hamdan filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the military commission convened to try him was unlawful and lacked the protections required under the Geneva Conventions and the United States Code of Military Justice.
The amicus brief prepared by the Bar Human Rights Committee argued that the tribunals were in breach of fundamental rights under international law citing the guarantees provided under English law and under the European Convention on Human Rights and tracing the origins and development of the protections guaranteed by the writ of habeas corpus in English law.
R v Muhareem Garip & others
15.05.2005
A multi-handed people smuggling case involving the largest investigation into human trafficking ever conducted by the National Crime Squad. In this case David Williams and Rufus D’Cruz made successful use of the “Goodyear” procedure. Having carefully considered the strength of the case, Garip pleaded guilty, on an agreed basis and having received an indication as to sentence. He received a substantially reduced sentence compared to the other defendants who contested the trial.
R v Amer Ramzan & others
17.04.07
This was at the time the largest ever money-laundering prosecution. There were three trials involving some 12 defendants. The main defendant was the proprietor of a small travel agency in Halifax, through which at least £130 million in illicit cash was laundered in a period of 18 months. The overall value of the money laundering, much of which was said to have been laundered out of the jurisdiction was some £300 million. The case papers ran to over 10,000 pages. Rufus D’Cruz, led by David Williams, appeared for one of the co–defendants whom it was said assisted in the transportation of large cash hauls. This defendant was the only one to be acquitted. The cases then proceeded to the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords, becoming leading cases in relation to the mens rea of conspiracy in money laundering cases.
R v Weir
02.05.01; House of Lords
[2001] 1 W.L.R. 421 [2001] 2 All E.R. 216 [2001] 2 Cr. App. R. 9; Times, February 9, 2001
This high-profile appeal to the House of Lords in a murder case examined the effect of the Human Rights Act 1998 on the right of the Crown to appeal out of time. Mr Weir had been convicted of murder on the basis of DNA evidence. However the evidence had been unlawfully obtained because the DNA profile had been unlawfully retained and the conviction was therefore overturned by the Court of Appeal. The Crown sought leave to appeal to the House of Lords, but did so one day out of time. The Crown sought to argue that refusal of the late application was disproportionate and in breach of their Article 6(1) right to a fair trial and (3) right of access to a court. In dismissing the appeal, their Lordships ruled that the words of the Criminal Appeal Act (1968) were clear and they had no power to extend time. More crucially they found that the European Convention on Human Rights required contracting states to guarantee the rights of their citizens under the convention rather than conferring any rights upon the state itself.
