Rod has had decades of experience of defending in high profile criminal cases covering the whole range of criminal offences including murder, rape, international drugs and people smuggling conspiracies, and the most serious and complicated fraud and financial crime cases.
He has built a reputation as a tenacious, determined and persuasive advocate, whether it be in exercising judgement and skill in legal submissions before judges or engaging with juries with winning speeches. He prides himself on his successful rapport with juries.
Equally at home with thorough detailed preparation of complex paperwork and the cut and thrust of courtroom advocacy and incisive cross-examination, Rod particularly relishes being better armed for the fray than his opponent and enjoys novel challenges in fields hitherto untrodden.
The trouble he takes to understand, empathise with and reassure lay clients is second to none and Rod, coming from the stable of Sir Dingle Foot’s diverse Commonwealth Chambers, is particularly happy interacting with people from cultural and economic backgrounds different from his own. He is often briefed on cases representing young people from deprived homes who have ended up in serious trouble from gang culture and street crime.
Rod is known for his unflappable and calming presence in the courtroom in the face of the unexpected and enjoys the trust of judges and clients alike. He is totally committed to his clients and unhesitatingly calls out unfairness and injustice wherever it appears.
Rod is experienced in Courts Martial army defence work in Germany and enjoys Chambers association with the Royal Navy lawyers.
To illustrate the breadth and variety of Rod’s cases, as far back as 1982 in R v Flavius, following a successful verdict of not guilty for the defendant in a jury trial for assault on police, Rod represented the defendant, now the claimant, in a successful civil action for aggravated and exemplary damages [ Flavius v Metropolitan Police Commissioner in the High Court ] achieving the highest award of damages against police at the time ( Mr Justice Leonard found liability for a racist attack by a police officer on a middle-aged West Indian by gratuitously breaking his leg with a truncheon in a police van and subsequently lying that Mr Flavius had fallen downstairs while violent).
By contrast, in 1995, the case of R v Rees Jones, Wren & others, a 6 month 8.5 million mortgage fraud trial at Newport Crown Court made front page headlines [ e.g. Daily Mail 23.3.1995 ] after Rod’s determined submissions of abuse of process on behalf of Mr Wren led to the indictment being stayed. The headlines proclaiming “Case too complicated for a Jury to Understand” and “Collapse of Trial costs the Taxpayer Millions” misguidedly led to questions in Parliament agitating for jury trials to be abolished in fraud trials. Rod continues to be equally at home in paper-heavy fraud cases as he is in cases of extreme violence and sexual abuse, as may be seen from a selection of his cases below in different parts of the country. He especially enjoys fighting cases in London and the South East, particularly in his beloved Essex where he lives.
Rod’s distinguished late Head of Chambers, Sir Desmond de Silva KC, said of Rod when Rod took silk in 2006 that he had built a reputation for being fearless and undaunted in taking on the most difficult and most challenging of cases. It was said of Rod in the Legal 500 (2017/18) “He always makes a good impression, even in the case of the most difficult clients”.
In the last two years particularly, Rod has represented several defendants with serious and varied mental health conditions on murder charges and has been able to deploy to good effect his exceptional expertise in this field and excellent interpersonal skills, exercising patience and empathy with clients when other colleagues may have despaired, and displaying acute insight and understanding with MH professionals and expert witnesses.
Rod continues to take on serious and high-profile trials. In February 2025, after the defendant in a serious rape case was acquitted by the jury on all counts [ R v DS ], the trial judge at Ipswich Crown Court wrote to Rod “Thank you for treating us all to a tremendous closing speech. It is a long time since I heard a great silk in full flow”.
Rod took silk in 2006 and was invited to become joint Head of Goldsmith Chambers in May 2022 (he had previously been Head of their Crime Team for some years). It was felt that Rod’s reputation for integrity and fair-dealing was ideally suited to this role which he very much enjoys.
Interested in instructing Mr Johnson KC?
Please call 020 7353 6802 or complete the form below:
Crime Barrister
Notable Cases
R v AW: Leading for the defence and was the only one of 20 defendants to be acquitted of both manslaughter and murder. The case involved a rival gang of schoolboys chasing and stabbing to death the 15 year old victim, openly brandishing a samurai sword and knives in front of horrified commuters. The case raised fundamental issues in the national tv news and press with politicians commenting on attitudes of modern youths and social media in the inner cities. It was the biggest joint enterprise murder prosecution at that time.
R v BO & others: Defendant accused of a complex conspiracy to supply massive quantities of drugs and guns. Rod’s client was the only defendant to be acquitted against the odds and the corrupt officer was later himself prosecuted for perverting the course of justice because of these matters being exposed.
R v KB: Rod led Rob ( “Judge” ) Rinder for the defence in the case of a notorious gangland contract killing in 2007, by shotgun and arson : the trial resulted in an acquittal of Rod’s client, following powerful legal submissions of no case to answer at the close of the Prosecution case, including the defence asserting police corruption. The defendant was later described by the police as one of Britain’s most wanted gangsters.
R v AC: Rod led for the defence in this murder case which received high profile news coverage. Defendant was acquitted of both murder and manslaughter after Rod had taken the unusual but effective course of persuading the trial judge that the jury be permitted to sit in the driver’s seat of an identical prison van brought to the Old Bailey in order that they might view for themselves the driver’s line of sight.
R v AM: Represented the defendant, a Cambridge-educated City actuary, pleading diminished responsibility at a trial lasting 6 weeks. The defendant had suffered a mental breakdown and shot his flatmate with a harpoon (diver’s speargun) and then turned the weapon on himself.
R v MSR: Led for the defence in a complex immigration conspiracy spanning 10 years where his client was the alleged mastermind behind a series of companies that provided illegal concrete workers to important construction sites such as the Drax Power station. The trial lasted 8 weeks.
R v Walker & Hales: The appellants had thrown their victim from a third floor balcony. The point of law Rod argued in the Appeal Court was the trial judge’s direction to the jury on intention in attempted murder. The Court accepted Rod’s submissions that where the expanded “foresight” direction is appropriate, the jury should be directed to use “virtual certainty” as the test rather than “high probability” [Archbold 19-108 ].
R v ADS : This was a remarkably challenging case where Rod’s experienced junior was invited by the trial judge to immediately instruct a QC to defend this difficult 2-week trial with the trial commencing the next day. The Defendant was threatening to sack his legal team who were concerned about his defence that he could not have committed the brutal and sadistic acts against women that he was accused of (including attempting to drown a victim in a lake) because he was under constant surveillance by Special Branch as a danger to the public : he wanted Rod to call Special Branch to give evidence as if the allegations were true, they would have observed him committing the crimes. Rod was able, exercising extreme patience, to dissuade him from this unrealistic and unhelpful course and to conduct a viable defence, cross-examining the witnesses carefully according to instructions : the allegations including four rapes – some historic – and offences of extreme torture of his victims in his role as a pimp . The case attracted considerable media attention due to the horrific nature of the violence against the women whom the defendant controlled, it being said that he had conducted a savage and brutal reign of terror spanning thirty years. Rod showed his skill in mastering a wealth of detailed evidence and instructions in a very short time, in dealing with an exceptionally volatile client and in cross-examining effectively vulnerable and traumatized witnesses.
R v SM & others: This VHCC case [ IFFO Scheme ] with a trial time estimate of 4 months required Rod to assimilate voluminous paperwork ( notional NAE page count 4.3 million ). Rod and his colleagues pressurised the prosecution during many administrative and disclosure hearings continually, from September 2020 until the trial was settled by the tendering of acceptable pleas and sentencing in April 2023, and concluded with complex POCA proceedings on 30th September 2024 which were successful in Rod’s client’s case. Rod and his experienced junior, to the client’s huge relief, persuaded the judge exceptionally not to implement the 5 years plus custodial sentence guideline for the defendant but to suspend the sentence and make a nominal POCA order. The case concerned a fraudulent investment scheme involving a gold mine in Ecuador. Over a period of nearly 2 years, 344 investors paid 5.4 million pounds into the project : the money was dissipated. Rod’s client was alleged to have been one of the two defendants who created the scheme and were its principal beneficiaries. The defendant was a well-known and high-profile analyst in the City who had published articles in financial journals and national newspapers and made appearances on TV. The fraud was complex involving the sale of artisanal mining rights requiring a specialised knowledge of how boiler room frauds operate and the leasing and licensing of Ecuadorian mines, the concept and nature of collective investment schemes, the viability of commission payments and percentages, due diligence and compliance procedures, legislative incompatibilities between the UK and Ecuador, the investigative role of the Insolvency Service and the operational ambit and requirements of escrow accounts.
R v WJ: This was a tragic case of a defendant of good character who murdered his wife in the matrimonial home after 19 years of being together. The prosecution case put simply was that after a campaign of abusive messages and arguments, fuelled by jealousy and the impending break-up of the marriage, Rod’s client had tried to strangle his wife and stabbed her to death with a carving knife. He had then telephoned the police and falsely claimed that his wife had threatened him and stabbed him with a knife. He further claimed that he had pushed her down in self-defence but he had then suffered an epileptic aura or episode and could not remember what happened after that. Rod was leading a very experienced junior, his Deputy Head of Chambers. There were expert reports in depth and detail concerning the defendant’s history of epilepsy, the effects and manifestations of an epileptic aura (including the effect of such an aura on intention and memory), and whether the defendant could have been faking epileptic fits afterwards at the hospital and in custody at the prison following treatment for a suicide attempt. At the conclusion of the trial, the experienced trial judge commended Rod for the way he had run this difficult defence and expressed the gratitude of the Court for the sensitivity Rod typically showed in cross-examination of traumatised witnesses and his assistance on the problematic points of law concerning the defence of loss of control.
R v K: This was an 8 week trial involving a sophisticated criminal operation by an Organised Crime Group to import and distribute millions of illegal cigarettes ( part counterfeit ) into the UK over a period of 5 years under the guise of legitimate haulage companies and storage facilities. There was associated money-laundering of the proceeds. The 7 defendants, of which Rod’s client was one, were all Polish and alleged to have been part of a much wider network including a number of names on the original indictment who had already been tried and sentenced. There were significant seizures of cash ( over £500,000 ), cigarettes ( over 17 million ) and tobacco ( over 3 tonnes ). The trial resulted in a hung jury for Rod’s client despite him being filmed and then arrested while unloading a consignment hidden in furniture deliveries.
R v MZ: Rod’s client was first on an indictment brought against 10 taxi drivers accused of multiple historic rapes and related sexual offences perpetrated upon children over a ten year period. The children were said by the Prosecution to have been deliberately targeted on the streets because of their vulnerability, plied with alcohol, cannabis and cigarettes and in short, callously groomed. The trial lasted 3 and a half months. Rod was able to display his skill in cross-examining the vulnerable witnesses with care while at the same time putting his client’s case fully and vigorously, and so impressively that a convicted co-defendant instructed Rod privately on his appeal.
R v E G-T: Rod’s client was charged with the murder of her 3 month old son, one of 2 twins. She disputed any involvement in the death of her child. Her secondary defence was infanticide. Rod was responsible for presenting the legal arguments that the defence of infanticide should be left to the jury in a case where there was over a week of expert psychiatric evidence relating to the mental state of the defendant. Key aspects of the evidence included a) whether the balance of the defendant’s mind was not disturbed by reason of her not having fully recovered from the effect of giving birth to the twins and whether such failure was not an operative or substantial cause of the disturbance of the balance of her mind ; b) the shortcomings of Social Services in failing to adequately support this vulnerable mother, who had a history of schizophrenia and post-natal depression, to cope with her alcohol and cannabis use The trial was allocated to a High Court Judge because of the complexity of the issues in the case and lasted for 8 weeks. Rod was able to use his empathy to support the emotionally traumatised defendant during the trial process.
R v UK & Another: Rod represented a young Asian man aged 22 who was charged with attempted murder in a drive-by shooting in broad daylight with a Skorpion sub machine gun. The victim who was wounded in the chest and thigh was lucky to survive what the Prosecution said was clearly intended as a “planned execution” with the use of an illicit tracker on the target vehicle and carefully planned means of escape. The defendant ( with the shooter ) managed to flee the country to Pakistan and returned only to be arrested at the airport. The attack was said to be drugs/gang related. This was an extremely difficult 4 week trial to defend, with Rod’s client admitting that he was the driver but insisting that he was recruited at the last minute by the shooter to take part in a robbery of drug dealers and to drive the vehicle. He had met the shooter in prison and was afraid of him, even scared to name him. The defendant claimed that he had no idea that the shooter had a firearm until he produced it from concealment when he had stopped the car on instructions. Rod was not deterred by the wealth of prosecution evidence against his client and left no stone unturned in fighting the case with his usual tenacity, visiting the locus in quo with his instructing solicitor and junior and walking the labyrinthine “escape route” the two men took on foot.
R v ED: Rod represented a boy aged 15 at the time of the offences, who was charged with joint enterprise murder, attempted murder and a separate violent disorder. The case concerned street violence in East London between 2 groups of youths where one victim died of stab wounds and another was seriously injured. The weapons used were large machetes carried in sheaths. The defendant was 16 at time of trial with fluctuating mental health ( he required an intermediary at trial and extensive mental health support). The case turned upon close analysis of CCTV and the law on joint enterprise. There had been a finding of conclusive grounds in his case that he was a victim of modern slavery and had been exploited for county lines purposes, despite coming from a good family. He suffered from autism and ADHD and was being treated with medication but was subject to extreme mood swings which Rod as leading defence counsel was able to understand and manage with daily constant consultations and liaisons with his support team. Rod gave him the confidence to give evidence in his own defence.
R v MD: Rod represented the defendant who was charged with murder of his estranged wife. The Prosecution case was that he killed her in a jealous rage as she was trying to leave the home, battering her with his fists, striking her with a lampstand causing brain injury and strangling her. The defendant at trial had a unique range of physical and mental disabilities, including being registered blind, type 2 diabetes, epilepsy and diagnosed personality disorder which made him aggressive, all of which Rod managed with his accustomed patience and empathy.
R v AF: Rod secured acquittals for a defendant accused of 9 counts of rape and sexual offences on a female complainant when she was a child between the ages of 7 and 15. The alleged offences were historic, took place in different counties over a period, and were linked to other alleged sexual offending.
R v DH: The defendant, a recovering alcoholic and drug addict, was charged with a brutal murder of a drug user acquaintance visiting his flat. The Prosecution alleged and were able to prove that the defendant had inflicted multiple blows to the victim’s skull causing a fracture and brain damage, and literally had smashed his face in with fist, elbow and shod feet. Rod represented him at his 3 week trial in June 2025. The extensive expert forensic evidence, in particular DNA and blood spatter, was overwhelming but Rod challenged the findings with his usual skill and commitment despite the hopeless nature of his client’s case of self-defence and/or accident.
R v DS: Rod secured acquittals for a young member of the 3rd paratrooper regiment on 3 counts of rape and one of strangulation and the judge unusually emailed Rod during the case and complimented him on his final speech as quoted in the introduction above.
