Lucy Sweetland
- CPS Panel (Grade 3)
- Attorney General’s C Panel
- Criminal Bar Association
- South Eastern Circuit
- Women in Criminal Law (WICL)
- Megarry Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn
- Lord Denning Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn
- Lord Brougham Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn
- Bar Professional Training Course, Kaplan Law School, Outstanding
- Graduate Diploma in Law, Kaplan Law School, Commendation
- BA History, University of Cambridge
Instructing Lucy Sweetland
To instruct Lucy or for any further information please contact our clerks on +44 (0)20 7440 8888 or clerks@2br.co.uk.
Lucy’s practice focuses upon the most serious criminal cases, from murder, kidnapping, possession of firearms and large-scale drug trafficking, to rape, sexual assault and fraud.
Recent instructions in homicide cases include acting for the defence in what South Wales Police described as one of the largest and most complex investigations they had undertaken into the activities of an organised crime group; Lucy’s client was acquitted before half-time following legal argument as to the admissibility of an alleged confession. She also prosecutes as a led junior in these cases, for example the stabbing of a young man in West London which resulted in convictions for murder and violent disorder.
Lucy has considerable expertise in serious sexual offences. As Disclosure Counsel in a highly sensitive case of historic sexual abuse at a residential school in the 1960s and 1970s, she advised investigators and formed part of the prosecution team at trial, which culminated in the conviction of two former members of staff. She has also acted as led junior in other prosecutions of very serious recent and non-recent sexual offending, such as a man convicted of a campaign of abuse against his two stepdaughters leading to an extended sentence of 30 years custody.
This experience makes Lucy ideally placed to represent those accused of a wide range of sexual offences, and she is able to take a proactive but sensitive approach to defending these allegations, sometimes resulting in charges being dismissed before trial.
Lucy also has a growing specialism in fraud and other financial crime. She is frequently instructed by prosecutors from an early stage in complex investigations such as the case of a trustee suspected of defrauding children’s charity, and a company director engaged in Computer Misuse Act offences against his competitors.
For the defence, Lucy was recently instructed to represent one of 18 defendants in an alleged £25 million fraud in the time-share industry. Lucy’s client was one of only three individuals acquitted by the jury, following a three-month trial at Southwark Crown Court.
Alongside her criminal advocacy, Lucy has an expanding practice in professional discipline, inquests and inquiries, and other quasi-criminal matters. She has acted both for and against the police in applications for cash forfeiture and freezing injunctions and appeared in the High Court in contempt proceedings for breach of a civil injunction.
She assisted in drafting the Home Office’s response to the Independent Inquiry on Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA) and in 2024 was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown, which means she is instructed to provide advice and representation to Government Departments in inquests, inquiries and other matters touching upon criminal and regulatory issues.
Practice Areas
Lucy’s practice involves representing defendants charged with the most serious criminal offences including rape, homicide and causing grievous bodily harm with intent, as well as the full range of drugs and dishonesty offences. She has particular experience both representing and cross-examining vulnerable witnesses and defendants.
She ensures meticulous preparation and a strategic approach to cases from the outset and is often chosen to represent individuals of good character facing serious allegations such as sexual assault and fraud.
Lucy is also a Grade 3 CPS prosecutor and is regularly instructed as sole counsel to prosecute complex and multi-handed trials in the Crown Court including fraud and money laundering, kidnapping and serious violence, as well as being instructed to advise on matters pre-charge and as disclosure counsel in complex investigations involving sensitive police investigations and historic third-party material.
As a led junior, Lucy has acted for the both the prosecution and defence in multi-handed cases of murder, attempted murder, modern slavery and drug trafficking. She is used to dealing with complex issues around cell site and other telecommunications data, surveillance operations and expert DNA evidence. She also has considerable experience of cases involving the prosecution of historic sexual offences with multiple complainants, and the legal and evidential challenges those cases bring.
Lucy has also appeared before the Court of Appeal in successful appeals against sentence and conviction. These include a 16-year-old whose sentence for aggravated burglary involving a firearm was reduced to 5 years from 6 years 8 months, and a client whose suspended sentence for sexual assault was referred by the Attorney General as unduly lenient, but upheld by the Court of Appeal.
Notable crime - serious and complex cases
R v RL (2025)
Led by Tracy Ayling KC in a six-week trial prosecuting a nursery worker for the abuse of multiple babies and toddlers in her care, resulting in convictions on 21 counts of child cruelty.
R v RJ (2025)
As junior alone, prosecuting a defendant for possession of multiple firearms with intent to endanger life, and supply of Class A drugs, leading to the imposition of a 15-year extended sentence.
R v RW (2025)
Defending a young man accused of raping and strangling his ex-partner during the course of their relationship; the defendant admitted a charge of stalking resulting from their break-up but the jury acquitted him of the rape and strangulation allegations.
R v DF & others (2024-25)
Defending one of 18 former employees of a time-share company alleged involved in a £25 million fraud. Lucy’s client was alleged to be part of the management of the company and indicted with conspiracy to defraud. She was acquitted by the jury after a three-month trial; one of only three defendants acquitted across several linked trials.
R v HK (2024)
Led junior for defendant accused of murdering his partner following an alleged course of domestic abuse; involved disputed pathology evidence on historic injuries as well as the fatal assault.
R v RK & JD (2024)
Prosecuting a trustee and director of a children’s charity for fraud by abuse of position and the misappropriation of more than £200,000 of donations. Lucy was instructed to advise on charge in 2021 and had responsibility for the case through to its successful conclusion.
R v HH (2023)
Representing a man accused of violently raping a woman on the street in North London whilst she was working as a sex worker, with issues both of fact and reasonable belief in consent; acquitted after a nine day trial.
R v AR & another (2023)
Led by Jacqueline Carey QC for the Crown in case of murder by stabbing, which involved extensive legal argument over the admissibility of an admission contained with the defendant’s Defence Statement; the defendant was convicted of murder.
R v AA & YH (2023)
As sole counsel, prosecuting two defendants for drug supply, kidnapping and blackmail offences against a teenager recruited by them as a drugs runner, where the teenage runner was called as a witness. Convictions and sentences of 7 and 8 years resulted.
R v PH & PH (2023)
Prosecuting a husband and wife for a catalogue of sexual and physical abuse and cruelty towards their three children and two grandchildren over four decades. Instructed as disclosure counsel from the point of charge and throughout two month trial, resulting in convictions on 37 counts.
R v MQ & others (2022)
Led by Allan Compton KC representing one of six defendants charged with murder during the alleged robbery of a cannabis factory and participation in the activities of an organised crime group. Acquitted during the Crown’s case following successful legal argument on an alleged confession.
R v KG (2021)
Defending on charges of conspiracy to supply multiple kilos of cocaine. The case against KG, a man of previous good character, rested on surveillance and telephone links to other alleged conspiratory. This evidence was substantially undermined through the trial process, to the extent that after a hung jury the prosecution decided not to proceed to a retrial.
Lucy is frequently instructed by healthcare regulators, such as the Nursing and Midwifery Council and the General Dental Council, in interim and substantive hearings, and has also appeared on behalf of professionals facing Fitness to Practise proceedings.
She has experience presenting complex cases involving alleged misconduct and clinical competence issues, relying on expert evidence as well as lay witness testimony, and is able to apply the skills and judgment developed before juries and professional tribunals in the criminal courts. Lucy has also received instructions as Special Counsel to cross examine in sensitive cases where a Registrant is otherwise acting as a litigant in person.
Lucy has a developing practice in the Coroners’ Courts, including representing an interested party in a case relating to a young person’s suicide on school grounds. She has also been instructed for the bereaved family in an inquest which heard evidence from treating physicians about a vulnerable woman’s death following surgery.
Lucy was part of the team which drafted the Home Office’s response to the Independent Inquiry on Child Sexual Abuse (IICSA).
In 2024, Lucy was appointed to the Attorney General’s C Panel of Junior Counsel to the Crown, providing the Government with advice and representation in matters such as inquests and public inquiries.
In the last couple of years, Lucy’s instructions have included acting for the defence in an alleged £25 million time-share fraud, for which Lucy’s client was acquitted, and for the Crown in a conspiracy by an organised crime group targeting elderly victims, including one who was deceived into purchasing and handing over £300,000 of gold bullion by fraudsters posing as police officers.
She has also acted both for and against the police in contested cash forfeiture and freezing order applications. The careful analysis and preparation of accounting evidence, and cross examination of police officers has been able to secure the return of her clients’ funds in contested hearings before both the magistrates’ court and Crown Court.
Lucy is often instructed to provide pre-charge advice to the Crown in difficult cases, such as a charity director and trustee suspected of abusing their positions and misappropriating donations suspected to run to more than £200,000. Lucy retained conduct of that case throughout the investigation to trial, resulting in the conviction of both defendants. She brings this experience to her defence practice, which enables her to provide valuable advice and present her client’s case to best effect before the jury.
Notable fraud & financial crime cases
R v ZS and ZM (2025)
Prosecuting an organised fraud against elderly victims by impersonating police officers; one victim persuaded to purchase £300,000 of gold bullion which was handed over to a courier for the gang. Main defendant sentenced to 9 years custody.
R v DF & others (2024-25)
Defending one of 18 former employees of a time-share company alleged involved in a £25 million fraud. Lucy’s client was alleged to be part of the management of the company and indicted with conspiracy to defraud. She was acquitted by the jury after a three-month trial; one of only three defendants acquitted across several linked trials.
R v RK & JD (2024)
Prosecuting a trustee and director of a children’s charity for fraud by abuse of position and the misappropriation of more than £200,000 of donations. Lucy was instructed to advise on charge in 2021 and had responsibility for the case through to its successful conclusion.
R v BMB, TMB & JC (2023)
Prosecuting three defendants for laundering the proceeds of high value burglaries through a company set up to import electric bicycles. Involved significant bad character and inferential evidence alongside financial investigation, and resulted in the conviction of the first two defendants after trial (with the third defendant severed late on due to ill health).
