Mr Alex Langhorn
Membership: Criminal Bar Association
Education: LLB (Hons), University of Nottingham
Scholarships and Prizes:
Benefactors’ Scholarsip, Middle Temple
Blackstone Entrance Exhibition, Middle Temple
Keble Advanced International Advocacy Course Scholarship, Middle Temple
Level Four, Crown Prosecution Service Advocate Panel.
Level Three, Crown Prosecution Service Serious Crime Group Advocate Panel
Level Three, Crown Prosecution Service Fraud Panel
Mr Langhorn appears regularly in the Magistrates’ Court and the Crown Court, instructed by both the Crown Prosecution Service and Defence Solicitors. He is a category three prosecutor and his work includes cases which involve;
- Armed Robbery, Robbery, Burglary and other Offences under the Theft Act 1968;
- Fraud and Money Laundering Offences;
- Firearms Offences;
- Immigration and Identity Document Offences;
- Offences relating to the Importation, Production and Supply of Controlled Drugs;
- Offences under the Road Traffic Act 1988, with a particular emphasis on cases involving challenges to the Crown’s scientific evidence;
- Serious Violence and Disorder and
- Sexual Offences.
Mr Langhorn has dealt with a wide range of applications for anti-social behaviour orders, orders for the forfeiture of seized cash, injunctions to prevent gang-related violence, and sexual offences prevention orders. He also has experience of advising on and conducting proceedings brought under the Licensing Act 2003.
Mr Langhorn also acts for interested parties in inquests before the Coroner’s Court. He has been instructed in cases involving issues of causation and where reports have been sought under what was Rule 43 of the Coroner’s Rules (now regulation 28 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013).
Prior to commencing his pupillage Alex worked as a Legal Services Commission accredited Police Station Advocate.
Crime Ranked Tier 1: He excels in complex cases, and he punches well above his year of call (Legal 500 2019)
Crime Northern (Bar) Leading Barrister (Band 3): ” He is an excellent lawyer without question; if you want to know anything about the law he will know it. He is a walking encyclopaedia” (Chambers and Partners UK Bar 2019)
“He excels in complex cases, and he punches well above his year of call” (Legal 500 2018)
Recent and Notable Cases
R v AK and Others (Operation Fulcrum)(2015)
Prosecuting alone an eight-handed case involving two conspiracies to supply controlled drugs. The case involved extensive cell-site evidence.
R v Clarke (Court of Appeal) (2015)
Successful appeal against a sentence of six years imprisonment imposed for an offence of wounding with intent. The Court substituted a sentence of four years and nine months.
R v CQ (Operation Chuckwagon) (2015)
Prosecuting the Defendant who was charged with conspiracy to evade the duty payable on the importation of tobacco.
R v Mouhid (Court of Appeal) (2014)
Led by Andrew Thomas QC in a successful appeal against a confiscation order. The Crown Court had ordered , in line with R v Paulet, that the entirety of the wages obtained by an illegal immigrant were the proceeds of crime. The Crown did not oppose the appeal and indicated to the Court that following this case the national guidance on confiscation proceedings would be re-written.
R v KD (Operation Birwong II) (2014)
Representing the Defendant, who was acquitted of failing to comply with a notice issued under section 49 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 after the Trial Judge accepted, following legal argument, that the notice was defective and thus invalid.
R v DB (Operation Schipol) (2014)
Representing the Defendant who was charged, along with others, with attempting to incite a child under the age of thirteen to engage in sexual activity. The Defendant was particularly vulnerable and required the support of an intermediary.
R v LC (2014)
Successfully representing the Defendant who was charged with a series of historic sexual offences allegedly committed against the Complainant when she was nine years old. The case involved significant arguments as to disclosure. Allegations that the Defendant had failed to comply with the notification requirement under the Sexual Offences Act 2003 (arising from a previous conviction) were successfully severed from the trial indictment.
R v DM (2013)
Representing a twenty one year old Defendant charged with engaging in a sexual relationship with a fourteen year old girl. Allegations that the Defendant had cut his nickname into the arms of two other fourteen year old girls were successfully kept as separate proceedings.
R v KD (Operation Birwong) (2013)
Led Junior Counsel for the Defence in a case involving allegations of a multi-million US dollar credit card fraud. The Defendant sold cloned credit card data and laundered the proceeds through electronic currency before collecting it with false identity documents. The case involved thousands of pages of evidence and a vast number of computer files. Part of the evidence came from an investigation carried out by the United States’ Federal Bureau of Investigation. In the confiscation proceedings the Crown abandoned their attempts to obtain a £400,000 hidden assets finding after considering a skeleton argument prepared by the Defence.
R v G (Operation Challenger) (2013)
Representing one of a number of Defendants alleged to have been involved in a conspiracy to supply cannabis.
R v Masset, Peters, Rees, Tucker and Dunn (Operations Rosette and Burton) (2012)
Led Junior Counsel for the Prosecution in a case involving two linked conspiracies to commit armed robbery. The case involved extensive cell-site and automatic number plate recognition evidence.
R v Martucci (Operation Millbank) (2012)
Prosecuting a mortgage fraud in excess of £100,000. The Defendant was convicted after trial of furnishing false information to the building society.
Road Traffic Law
GH v DPP (2015)
The Appellant was charged with driving on a university campus whilst over the legal limit for alcohol in breath. A successful submission of no case to answer was made on the basis that the campus was not a public place. A Defendants Costs Order was made.
R v JG (2014)
The Defendant was charged with failure to provide a specimen of breath. A successful submission of no case to answer was made on the basis that the Police Officer had failed to afford the Defendant a proper opportunity to provide a sample. A Defendants Costs Order was made.
AG v DPP (2013)
The Appellant was charged with failure to provide a specimen of blood. The Crown did not oppose the Appeal after considering the Skeleton Argument submitted on behalf of the Appellant about the sufficiency of his attempts to provide a sample. A Defendants Costs Order was made.
The Inquest touching upon the death of MEK (2013)
A five-day jury inquest inquiring into the death of a resident at a care home.
The Inquest touching upon the death of CK (2012)
Acting for the family in a three-day jury inquest inquiring into the death of a patient in the care of a hospital.
AG v DPP (2013)
A three-day jury inquest inquiring into the death of a chemical plant employee. The case involved expert medical and scientific evidence on the issue of causation (and in particular the effects of the human body of exposure to various amounts of acetone cyanohydrin);