Lauren has substantial experience representing clients in complex criminal cases. She has successfully represented clients involved in a broad range of offences including armed robbery, kidnap, fraud, offences against the person and serious sexual offences.

Should clients require discreet private representation by experienced counsel at the police station, Lauren is a fully accredited police station representative. Lauren has successfully represented many high profile clients at the police station, which has resulted in the authorities no longer pursuing investigations.

As well as her general criminal practice, Lauren is experienced in corporate crime and compliance matters involving money laundering, bribery and corruption, sanctions and fraud. She has undertaken complex internal investigations, both domestic and international. Lauren has advised companies on voluntary disclosure and corrective action, assisting clients in avoiding exposure to criminal charges. Lauren has also advised clients in relation to implementing preventative measures such as due diligence and internal compliance plans.

Lauren is a level 3 prosecutor with particular expertise in conducting serious trials involving vulnerable witnesses. Lauren is also a member of the RASSO panel.

Lauren is instructed in regulatory matters and offers advice to fire & rescue authorities, public authorities, corporations and individuals in respect of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005. Lauren has acted in numerous high-profile defence cases and prosecutions under the Order.

• R v M [2018] – Led junior, successfully prosecuting two defendants charged with historic familial rape.
• R v B [2018] – Led junior prosecuting a number of defendants involved in a conspiracy to commit GBH. This case was widely published due to the CBO imposed preventing the defendants making violent drill music.
• R v D [2017] – Reading CC: Sole counsel representing D charged with a ‘stranger rape’.
• R v H [2017] St Albans CC: Led junior representing one of eight defendants charged with importing firearms and ammunition into the United Kingdom.
• R v H [2017] – Leicester CC: Led junior representing first on the indictment in a three-month multi handed production of cannabis conspiracy.
• R v I [2016] – Manchester CC: Led junior successfully representing first on the indictment in a sham marriage trial. D was accused of leading an organisation which trafficked women from Eastern European countries into the UK for marriage to Pakistani men who did not have leave to remain in the UK.
  C [2016] – Reading CC: Sole counsel successfully representing charged with two offences of rape.
• R v B [2016] – Harrow CC: Sole counsel in a lengthy multi-handed VAT fraud trial. D was the only defendant of four to be acquitted.
• R v T [2016] – Guildford CC: Led junior in a historic neglect and sexual abuse case involving seven complainants.
• R v M [2015] – Preston CC: Sole counsel in a complex multi-handed kidnap trial; successfully representing the only defendant out of seven to be acquitted in the case.
• R v O [2015] – Maidstone CC: Led junior representing third on the indictment in a multi-handed drug importation and supply conspiracy.
• R v C [2015] – Luton CC: Led junior representing fourth on the indictment in a large multi-handed drug importation conspiracy of hundreds of kilos of cocaine.
• R v M [2014] – Isleworth CC: Sole counsel successfully representing second on the indictment in a multi-handed £8 million heroin importation.
• R v D [2014] – Nottingham CC: Led junior representing third on the indictment in a multi-handed conspiracy to supply and produce amphetamine and cocaine.
• R v S [2014] – Isleworth CC: Led junior representing first on the indictment in a multi-handed conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm with intent.
• R v A [2013] – Isleworth CC: Led junior representing one of eight defendants in a conspiracy to import drugs and cigarettes into the UK.
• R v F [2013] – Isleworth CC: Sole counsel successfully representing D charged with a serious sexual assault. The case involved the cross-examination of a number of vulnerable witnesses.