Ian Goldsack
Book this Barrister
Personal Profile
Please Click Here for Ian's profile in PDF
“Thorough and highly intelligent” – Chambers and Partners
Ian Goldsack’s practice encompasses criminal law, inquest and regulatory work, and advising and appearing in Court of Protection cases.
Crime
Criminal instructions are equally balanced between prosecution and defence work.
Grade 4 Crown Prosecutor for a number of years. Secured Grade 4 Panel status in the recent CPS quality assessment process (covering the North Eastern, Northern, and Wales and Chester circuits). He is also accredited for the CPS Rape Panel.
Practice in more recent years has focussed upon serious crime, including murder, manslaughter, serious sexual and other violent offending, dangerous driving (including where death has resulted), offences involving firearms, arson, and offending contrary to the Misuse of Drugs Act, with a particular recent specialism in fraud work.
Has advised and appeared in cases concerning the recovery of costs, confiscation pursuant to the Proceeds of Crime Act and asset recovery, and before the Divisional Court regarding matters which have been case stated.
Has experience doing VHCC.
Inquest, judicial review and regulatory work
Experience over many years conducting proceedings before Coroner’s Courts, including appearances in several high profile and long duration cases. The majority of the inquest work has arisen in circumstances where Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights is engaged, particularly following deaths in custody. Experience of judicial review and regulatory work ancillary to his inquest practice.
Court of Protection
Developed more recent experience working in the Court of Protection and advising concerning issues of mental capacity and deprivation of liberty. Instructed on behalf of the Official Solicitor and a number of local authorities in the Midlands and North East.
Other experience
Has appeared before Mental Health Tribunals. Secured “Core Participant” status for the Patients Association at the Mid-Staffordshire NHS Foundation Trust public inquiry (chaired by Robert Francis QC).
Provided training to the police concerning “Achieving Best Evidence” and the video recorded interviewing of child and vulnerable witnesses.
Lectured local law societies on a number of topics, including hearsay, bad character, asset recovery and criminal confiscation, and the sentencing provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
Also lectured and provided papers concerning inquest law and coronial practice.
Has had responsibility for pupillage in his chambers (in Sheffield) and is a designated Pupil Supervisor.
Professional Associations
Criminal Bar Association
South Yorkshire Medico-Legal Society
Education
Hayfield Comprehensive School, Doncaster
Brasenose College, Oxford (BA (Hons) Jurisprduence)
Inns of Courts School of Law, London (Bar Vocational Course)
Called to the Bar 1997
Gray’s Inn Wilfred Watson scholar
North Eastern Circuit Junior in 2005.
Areas of Expertise:
Email: clerk@stjohnsbuildings.co.uk
Telephone: 0114 273 8951
Crime
Case examples
R. v. Nelson: Gang related assassination as part of the Sheffield “Post Code War” by a group of masked gunmen. Case involved anonymous witness evidence. Junior counsel for the prosecution.
R. v. Maruf: Murder in the course of robbery. Defendant arrested on a European arrest warrant. Issues of intent and joint enterprise. Junior counsel for the defence.
R. v. Goodwin: Fatal stabbing in a domestic context. Issues of intent and self-induced intoxication. Junior counsel for the defence.
R. v. Beardmore: Murder of a prostitute. Body not recovered for a substantial period of time. Multiple people arrested prior to the defendant being charged. Significant volumes of unused material. Junior counsel for the prosecution.
R. v. Hatton ([2005] EWCA Crim 2951 and [2006] Crim LR 353): Murder case involving complex legal issues relating to mistake of fact, precedent, self defence and voluntary intoxication. Junior counsel for the prosecution.
R. v. Barker: High profile case of child cruelty involving potentially complex causation issues concerning the death of a child. Junior counsel for the defence.
R. v. Odudu and Awad: Sophisticated and carefully planned fraud upon London institutions in which several hundred thousands of pounds were stolen (and untraced). One of the defendants was represented by the then Chairman of the Bar, Peter Lodder QC. Prosecuted.
R. v. Harrison: High profile case of dishonesty resulting from the theft of over £1million of vintage guitars in Italy. Complex issues of fact. Defended.
R v. Christy: Multiple counts of dishonesty relating to fraudulent asbestos survey work resulting in loss in excess of £1.2million. Prosecuted.
R. v. Bielby: Multiple counts of dishonesty over a 5 year period alleged against a Council employee. Prosecuted.
R. v. Holdsworth: Fraud by an employee of a finance company involving loans in excess of £100,000. Defended.
R. v. Ibbotson: Handling stolen motor cars (stolen by other accused through “Hanoi style” burglaries) and mortgage fraud. Complex proceeds of crime confiscation proceedings. Defended.
R. v. Williams: 10 police officers charged with various offences arising out of an arrest and subsequent death in custody. Complex evidential issues concerning the quality and reliability of audio recorded within the custody suite. VHCC. Junior counsel for the defence.
R. v. Hockenhull ([2006] EWCA Crim 3248): One of the first (successful) appeals against conviction based upon the presence of a police officer on a jury. Counsel for the appellant in the Court of Appeal.
AG Reference (sub nom Simbarashe Dziruni) ([2008] EWCA Crim 277 and [2008] 2 Cr.App.R.(S.) 99): Unsuccessful prosecution appeal against a non-immediate custodial sentence following offences under the Identity Cards Act 2006. Counsel for the respondent in the Court of Appeal (and at first instance).
R. v. Hill: Multiple counts of making and possessing indecent photographs. Complex and technical computer evidence (in which the defendant was expert). Prosecuted.
R. v. Allen: Multiple allegations of unlawful use of trade mark and breach of copyright (relating to counterfeit DVDs, CDs and computer games). Lengthy and involved confiscation proceedings following conviction. Prosecuted.
R. v. Verma: Senior hospital employee accused of sexual offending in respect of a female member of staff. Privately paid. Defended.
R. v. Beacock: Allegations of rape and other sexual offending (including buggery) on two step children. Defended.
R. v. Whincup: Multiple allegations of sexual offending alleged over three decades and involving several complainants. Defended.
R. v. Ali: Allegation of rape, discontinued by the prosecution following applications for third party disclosure. Defended.
R. v. Nawab and Din: Firearms offences committed in respect of an Asian wedding with more than 400 guests in attendance. Extensive and complex evidence. Prosecuted.
R. v. Bayliss: Difficult prosecution case concerning the death of a person riding on a stolen motorcycle. The defendant was the other person riding the same motorcycle. Prosecuted.
R. v. Slingsby: Case in which it was alleged the defendant had used a vehicle as a weapon following a domestic argument. Prosecuted.
R. v. Forrester: Death by dangerous driving (and “Hanoi style” burglaries). Defended.
R. v. Londesborough: Allegation of aggravated burglary against a heavily convicted defendant, discontinued by the prosecution following the service of defence expert evidence. Defended.
R. v. Horan (and others): Planned kidnap and ransom of a complainant who was deeply traumatised by the experience. Prosecuted.
R. v. Lawrence: Allegations of armed robberies at two addresses by a gang. Defended.
R. v. Mitchell (and others): Allegation of a planned robbery involving a delivery driver in which one of the accused turned Queen’s Evidence against the others. Prosecuted.
R. v. Marshall: Multiple allegations of robbery. Circumstantial case involving evidential difficulties concerning identification. Prosecuted.
R. v. Bennett: Offences of public disorder and causing grievous bodily harm with intent (where the victim suffered permanent brain injury) alleged in the context of organised football violence against a number of targeted suspects believed to be members of a hooligan group. Defended.
R. v. Sullivan: Allegation contrary to section 18 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. Victim suffered permanent brain injury. Cut throat defence and issues of identification. Defended.
R. v. Tullin: Serious allegation of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm in which the victim would not assist the prosecution (and where there were no other witnesses to the causation of her injuries). Prosecuted.
R. v. Wiggan: Possession with intent to supply class A drugs, allegedly delivered by courier from London. Prosecuted.
Michael Powell, Inquest: Lengthy and controversial inquest proceedings before the Birmingham Coroner’s Court, conducted over a three year period and culminating in a six week hearing before a jury.
Keith Mark Camm, Inquest: Eight week inquest before the Coroner for West Yorkshire involving complex issues of causation (the deceased had spent time in police custody and had been transferred to hospital prior to his death).