TAHIR MAHMOOD
Director - Criminal Defence Solicitor
TAHIR MAHMOOD
Tahir is an experienced and highly sought-after lawyer who specialises in serious and complex crime. He qualified as a Solicitor in 2000 and is an accredited Police Station and Court Duty Solicitor. Tahir has gained a reputation amongst clients for providing a high level of commitment to securing the best possible outcome to their cases and brings this experience and judgement to every case he undertakes. He is tenacious and good at thinking out what will happen. He regularly represents his clients at the Police Station and at Courts across the
country. He has, over the years, successfully represented clients charged with a range of serious offences, including Murder, Terrorism, Fraud, Death by Dangerous Driving, Drug Importation and large-scale drug conspiracies; firearm offences, serious Sexual offences, including allegations of rape, historic abuse and child grooming offences. Tahir has also acted in several reported extradition cases in recent years.
Tahir has established an effective working relationship with experienced Counsel and some of the country's leading Kings Counsel specialising in defending people being investigated for or already charged with grave and complex crimes. Tahir is noted for both his tactical and mature approach to cases and has a particular interest in dealing with young offenders, and has assisted them towards rehabilitation. He has also advised in cases involving professionals who are facing both criminal and disciplinary proceedings arising in connection with their work. Tahir has a particular reputation for earning the trust and confidence of his clients as they face the most difficult of situations.
​
As part of his work, Tahir has had to travel to other Countries to interview witnesses and collate evidence in preparation for the defence. With a proven track record of success, Tahir is often instructed as the solicitor of choice amongst lay clients.
​
He is a member of the Law Society Criminal Accreditation Scheme and Criminal Law Solicitors Association.
Notable Cases
R v Bashir, Maidstone Crown Court (2025): Represented one of ten individuals charged with involvement in an organised crime group involved in the large-scale supply of class A drugs and money laundering across Kent, London, and Surrey. Key defence witnesses were traced, and a forensic cell site expert was instructed to challenge the prosecution's case, leading to our client being the only defendant to be acquitted of all charges at trial.
R v Medlock, Kingston Crown Court, (2025): Neo-Nazi terror attack on a solicitor’s office during which the Defendant had
planned to kill a solicitor. Several key medical experts were instructed during the proceedings by the defence, and the defendant was found unfit to plead at a re-trial and given a hospital order.
Read Media Coverage
R -v- Shah, Huntingdon Crown Court (2024): Represented a defendant charged with others with arranging the delivery of firearms into the UK from Europe. Following lengthy and careful negotiations with the Prosecution and well-presented mitigation, we managed to secure an 18-month suspended sentence for our client.
R v FT, Birmingham Crown Court (ongoing): Large-scale fraud to the value of over a million pounds, involving alleged dishonest conduct by an individual acting in the capacity of a liquidator for various companies.
​
R v Barlas, Southwark Crown Court (2020): Fraud involving 7 defendants, to the value of over a million pounds, in which the bank accounts of individuals were compromised by one of the defendants who worked in the bank. Our client, an accountant in a senior management position at an accounting firm, was one of only two defendants acquitted after a 10-week trial.​
​​​R v Q and K& Others (2017) Nottingham Crown Court - Alongside two Leading KCs, we represented two defendants who were indicted with 6 others for murder following a fatal group revenge attack on two members of a rival group who were ambushed in their vehicle. The attack took place on a busy Nottingham street during the day and had been captured on CCTV and a mobile phone. The defendants admitted their involvement in the attack but denied knowledge that a knife was at the scene. The trial commenced on a joint enterprise murder allegation. Several days into the trial, a manslaughter plea was negotiated on a limited post – Jogee basis on behalf of both the clients. After the prosecution accepted pleas to unlawful act manslaughter, no evidence was offered on the murder charge.
​
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-36529982
​
R v H (2015) Aylesbury Crown Court: Represented a defendant who faced malicious allegations of Rape made by 14- year-old schoolgirl. The case involved complex & sensitive submissions to introduce evidence of the complainant’s sexual history & bad character. These were successfully made by the defence team. The defendant was unanimously acquitted on all counts.
​
R –v- AB & Others (2015) Southwark Crown: case of three defendants charged with a plot to blackmail prominent members of the Qatari Royal Family. The defendants are alleged to have demanded and tried to gain over half a million pounds with menaces from the Royal Family, in return for private photographs of them.
​
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3019578/Chauffeur-wife-face-jail-blackmailing-Qatari-royals-600-000-private-photos-USB-sticks-leftcar.html
​
R v Magloire and others (2010) Isleworth Crown Court : Represented one of four defendants charged with raping two generations of their family during the 1960 to 1980’s.
​
R v Farid and Others (2004): Successfully secured the acquittal of Arshad Farid, who alongside three others faced charges under the Terrorism Act. Offences ranged from receiving training in the making of firearms and explosives, receiving training in the making of chemical and biological weapon, possessing manuals, videos and audiotapes for purposes connected with terrorism and failing to disclose information that could have assisted the police.
Due to failings by the police and the Crown Prosecution Service, charges were dropped because evidence could not be prepared in time. This decision followed on from successful submissions by the defence for a strict timetable to be set by the Court, for disclosure of evidence in the case.
​
Read the media coverage
​
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3577035.stm
​​