Wajid Manzoor

Associate Solicitor

Wajid joined ITN Solicitors as a Solicitor within the Crime Department in January 2020.

Wajid has experience in litigating cases relating to serious general crime, murder, manslaughter, assault related matters, robbery, drug offences, Domestic Violence Protection Order Applications, sexual offences and protest work.

Wajid is also duty solicitor qualified and undertakes advocacy in the magistrates and youth courts. Wajid is known for being a great communicator with his clients and having the ability to evaluate cases efficiently and provide clear advice upon the circumstances.

I feel so fortunate to have my solicitor Wajid, his very professional, he help me through my case. I have always felt happy and comfortable to be around my solicitor, and he have helped me so much.

Prominent Cases

R v AK [2017] – Central Criminal Court - Conspiracy group of 13 defendant’s involved in Sham Marriages, whereby non EU nationals married EU national in order to obtain citizenship. Represented the Leading Defendant in the case alleged to have orchestrated the Sham operation with his partner. Thousands of pages of material were scrutinised, instructed leading computer experts instructed to review electronic material most of which formed the key basis of the prosecution case. Given Wajid's detailed case schedule created of the evidence and indepth knowledge about the case Wajid was able to advise the client on all aspects of the evidence against him directly or indirectly. When taking instructions from the Defendant Wajid was able to automatically assess whether there were discrepancies to what the prosecution evidence showed.

R v SR [2017] – Salisbury CC – 14 defendant case represented 1 defendant alleged to have been a courier for the large county line conspiracy to supply class A drugs between the midlands, London and Gloucester area – evaluation of thousands of pages of case material including cell site, message interactions and CCTV. Again Wajid was able to create a detailed case schedule and also gain in depth knowledge into the case to advise the client of the evidence. Again working with cell site experts to verify movements based upon client’s instructions and obtain statements from others the defendant associated with to provide a background into her encounter with the alleged main leader of the conspiracy to justify her movements and actions.

R v TA [ 2018] – Birmingham CC – Murder incident following an altercation during a amateur boxing match a brawl began within the building where racial words had been used, tables and chairs thrown around. The brawl spilt out to the high street. Following analysis of various angles of CCTV and enhancements as part of the defence case Wajid was able to provide a timeline of movements of certain individuals required that attacked the defendant. Upon an attendance on the defendant a defensive mark was identified, and an expert issued to review this. It was the defence case that this defensive wound was from a sharp item such as a knife. Reviewing CCTV and site attendance we were able to ascertain the knife had been used initially to attack the defendant who used his hand to defend/block the knife attack, the knife fell to the floor and the defendant armed himself with the knife to avoid further attack. Medical evidence was also obtained in relation to the defendant’s Cavus foot which affected the way he left the scene, this was also the reason for then hitting the deceased from behind once with the knife, the knife penetrated the juglar and the deceased passed away. The defendant left the country and was extradited back to the UK. The defendant was acquitted of murder and convicted of manslaughter.

R v LN & others [2016] – Southwark – Large fraud conspiracy case involving claims against ATOL after holidays booked through a fraudulent travel agency, said it was all a sham. Claims were successful and compensation paid. The defendant was of low IQ and unable to read documents, handwriting expert instructed to confirm the writing on the claim forms was not D’s although the signature was. D could not read and was simply directed to sign the form which he believed to be a document for his children’s school requirements. D also believed the holiday at concern was genuine as he had booked a holiday which he later went to but did not know this was a second sham taking place which he had no knowledge of, it was the actions of his partner who had pleaded guilty. D acquitted after trial.

R v TM & others [2018] – CCC – murder incident within a north London park where the deceased was stabbed in the heart, collapsed at the scene and passed away. Represented defendant’s charged with manslaughter. Review of various angles of CCTV, carry out site survey after conducted research and piecing material together to review the defendant’s account and see the site in person. Analyse case material creating detailed schedules including items found in the near vicinity, cell site and telephone evidence. Assessing client instructions with material.

R v PT [2019] – CCC – 2 cases of Attempted murder at separate events which was joindered by the prosecution – analysis of CCTV and police Body Worn Video Footage this was to establish at what point in time gunshot’s were heard and where the Defendant was at the relevant times. As the CCTV had no audio but the BWV did. Defendant denied possessing a firearm in one incident so was required to review movements through all material available as to who may be a possible gunman. There was also gunshot residue within the defendant’s vehicle used as part of the evidence. A firearms expert was instructed in relation to this and instructed to advise based upon the account provided and possibilities of how such residue can find itself within the car. Review of where the empty bullet cartridges were found and movement of Defendant too. In the second count it involved a shootout in a north London carpark again covered by CCTV. The defendant was alleged to have been identified by a police officer. A facial mapping expert was instructed as the identification image used was of very low quality. The Expert was able to confirm no clear identification could be made from such an image due to the quality even after enhancement. The expert was provided with a mugshot of the defendant when carrying out this work. Reviewing the identification with PACE D and the evidence from the facial mapping expert an application to exclude was successful for the second count. The defendant was acquitted of the first count following trial.

R v NR [ 2019] – Isleworth – Manslaughter where D had pushed the male who later went home and found deceased by his family. Review of CCTV, conversation on the 999 call which the defendant made following the fall of the male. Review of material found within the male’s flat along with statements of neighbours confirmed the male’s door would be open regularly as he would lose his keys and a mallet was also found. The prosecution stated the causal link of death was the push by the defendant causing a bleed to the defendant’s brain. The defendant lived alone and was struggling to breath 2 days after the incident when visited by a family member. Wajid instructed a kinetis expert to review and reconstruct the fall which was caught on CCTV at the time to ascertain whether the male’s head would have impacted with the floor, if so with what force and which area of the head the injury would be. Wajid then instructed a neurologist to ascertain in the circumstances whether a causal link could be made, there was a mark to the male’s head after the fall seen on cctv. Given the lack of information between the 2 days and the mallet at the address with a open door there was reasonable doubt in the case when put before a jury the defendant was acquitted of manslaughter.

R v KR – Manchester CC – Defendant accused of terrorism counts. Required review of vast amounts of electronic material some of which was very sensitive in nature, detailed schedule created from this evidence. Experts instructed for review on aspects of material/evidence, third party requests and statements taken to support the defence case. Defendant was acquitted of several counts and the other counts were undecided, therefore a hung jury for those.

R v SW [2020] – Highbury Corner Magistrates – HS2 Protest Case, defendant accused of obstructing lawful activity following review of the evidence the offence had not been made out, this required a review of case law and the legislation. No evidence offered at trial.

R v JT [2020] – City of London Magistrates – Protest Case represented 2 d’s both alleged to have committed criminal damage to a government building by gluing their hands to the glass windows. Review of legislation along with Articles 10 & 11 ECHR, case law on assessing proportionality [DPP v Zeigler]. Following trial D’s acquitted during the judgement the DJ found articles 10 and 11 were proportionately engaged.