Will Russell
  • Location: London City Office
  • Role: Supervising Solicitor
  • Practice Area: Criminal Defence

Will is an experienced criminal defence solicitor who has been working at GT Stewart since January 2009. Will is the head of our private client department and supervises a team of solicitors and paralegals at our busy Camberwell Green office. Will is instructed by clients of all backgrounds who have cases at every stage of the criminal justice system. He has a particularly strong reputation as a magistrates’ court advocate, frequently dealing with complex hearings such as trials, contested applications and cash seizure applications. The team that he supervises has an excellent record of securing positive results for their clients, with a strong emphasis on good client care. In recent years, Will has successfully represented clients in serious and complex matters including allegations of violence, sexual offences, road traffic matters and fraud.

Will has real expertise in dealing with vulnerable defendants and in particular those with mental health problems. He frequently represents clients in cases where issues such as fitness to plead and the defence of insanity arise. He understands the importance of instructing leading medical experts in these cases in order to obtain the best results for his clients.

A small selection of the different sort of cases that Will has recently been involved in includes:

  • R v DB – an allegation of wounding where DB had been identified by the complainant who was known to him, as being the person that stabbed him outside his home address. Acquitted after trial.
  • R v GN – numerous allegations of historical rape of a family member over many years. Acquitted after trial.
  • R v JM – JM was found not guilty at trial of having dishonestly retained thousands of pounds which had been transferred into her account.
  • R v LN – LN was found not guilty after trial of being drunk in charge of his motor vehicle after being arrested by police in the driver’s seat of his motor vehicle.
  • R v PM – PM was acquitted after trial of failing to provide a specimen of breath due to the police failure to comply with the relevant procedure.
  • R v FB – FB was acquitted of harassment of his former partner after defence enquiries revealed large amounts of mobile phone evidence which undermined the complainant’s account.
  • R v HO – found not guilty by reason of insanity of an aggravated burglary after HO used an axe to gain access to his neighbour’s home address and threatened the occupants.

Back to Staff's list