Stephen Vullo is one of the UK’s top murder barristers and is known for his proactive and strategic approach to defending his clients.

Stephen Vullo is regarded as one of the best criminal barristers on the basis of his proven-track record in successfully defending clients in high profile and serious cases

“Murder” is the most serious allegation an individual can face, and the consequences of conviction are a mandatory life sentence.  Consequently, clients need to make sure they instruct the best criminal barrister available.

Whilst the prosecuting authorities do their utmost to convince the general public and the courts that the evidence on which they rely is the product of a quality investigation, the reality is that often many police officers, scientific support staff, medical examiners and even forensic scientists are untrained for their investigative tasks. This fact, combined with the strong group pressures on Crown Prosecutors, police officers, civilian staff and external staff, means that it is all the more important for lawyers (solicitors and barristers) to adopt a methodical and forensic approach to each piece of information received, critically evaluating these to identify anything that is problematic or missing.

This is an approach that Stephen applies to all of his cases, including those involving allegations of gangland murder, contract killings, domestic murder, “honour killing” and revenge killing.

A proactive, collaborative approach to defending clients accused of murder

Stephen’s collaborative approach with his instructing lawyers, expert witnesses and clients means that all options are explored, including:

• Whether his client acted in self defence;
• Whether his client was provoked;
• Whether his client’s mental responsibility was substantially impaired (so-called “diminished responsibility“) or (s)he was suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning, or (s)he was insane at the time of the commission of the alleged offence;
• Challenging the admissibility of damaging admissions or confession evidence;
• Undermining the evidence that places his client at the crime scene and other circumstantial evidence (by challenging the reliability of police scientific evidence including contact trace material such as fingerprints and DNA, exposing flaws in mobile phone and cell-site evidence, exposing weaknesses in eye-witness testimony purporting to identify the suspect, proving the client was elsewhere at the relevant time (through alibi evidence).