Charlie Austin-Groome.

  • Barrister
  • 2021
What others say:

“One of the most accomplished junior barristers I have ever had the pleasure of briefing!”

“... courteous, hard-working, detail orientated and unafraid... he has secured excellent results through his hard work, intellect and dedication to the case.”

“It is rare to see such dedication and fight, in one so young.”

Practice Profile

Charlie specialises in the defence and prosecution of cases involving serious assault, sexual offences and confiscation matters in addition to general crime. Regularly instructed in complex cases well beyond his call, Charlie leaves no stone unturned in his preparation. He is known for putting in the extra mile.

Prior to life at the Criminal Bar, Charlie worked as a criminal paralegal at Blackfords. He was directly involved in the preparation of serious criminal cases. In addition to his own case load of general crime matters, Charlie spent many months assisting with the preparation of materials and argument on behalf of a number of clients represented by the firm in the Grenfell Inquiry. 

Qualifications
  • 2016-2019, Law LLB, University of Birmingham
  • 2020-2021, Bar Practice Training Course at BPP - Very Competent
  • Attained the second highest mark for criminal advocacy at BPP countrywide (2020)
Memberships
  • Nursing and Midwifery Council Approved Counsel
  • CPS General Crime Advocate Panel - Level 3
Present and Recent Instructions

  • R v D and D [Lewes] - Defence trial counsel for the second defendant charged with intimidation on a murder indictment. The first defendant was found guilty of murder. The jury acquitted the second defendant.
  • R v A [Snaresbrook] - Prosecuted at trial a section 18 offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent. The jury returned a guilty verdict.
  • R v H, B and H [Inner London] - Represented the first defendant on a charge of affray. After a seven-day trial, the defendant was found not guilty.
  • R v B and E [Woolwich] - Prosecuted a joint enterprise stabbing. Following trial, both defendants were convicted of section 18 causing grievous bodily harm with intent.
  • R v P [Norwich Crown Court] - Represented a client charged with section 20 wounding. After a four-day trial, the jury returned a not guilty verdict.
  • R v D and D [Portsmouth Crown Court] - Represented a youth charged with operating a county line phone. After lengthy discussions with the Crown, all charges were dropped.
  • R v M [Central Criminal Court] - Sole prosecution counsel in a two-week trial at the Old Bailey. The case involved 23 historic allegations of violent and sexual offences. Guilty verdicts were returned on all counts. The defendant was found dangerous, requiring an extended sentence.
  • R v L [Bradford Crown Court] - Instructed at trial to defend in a four-week conspiracy to defraud involving 16 defendants. Charlie represented the first defendant in the second trial listing. The defendant was found not guilty.