Pupillage banner

Natasha Lake

Natasha enjoys a broad and busy practice in serious crime and professional discipline, appearing before the Crown Court and Court of Appeal.

She has been praised by clients for her ‘meticulous attention to detail’ and ‘calm and measured submissions which command the attention of the court’. Natasha strives to provide accessible and straightforward advice to those she represents, no matter how complex the facts or law may be.

Natasha both prosecutes and defends and has acted in a broad spectrum of criminal cases including those involving serious violence, weapons, drug trafficking, sexual offences and fraud. Her practice increasingly involves cases of a serious or sensitive nature.

Natasha is regularly instructed to prosecute criminal offences on behalf of local and national governmental bodies. She further has particular experience in advising on and acting in Trading Standards cases, both prosecuting and defending.

Natasha often defends in professional discipline matters and has appeared before the HCPC and NMC.  
 

Notable cases

Crime

R v O

Natasha represented a defendant who was unfit to plead. Natasha’s legal argument secured the exclusion of hearsay evidence obtained close in time to the alleged offence. The jury ultimately found the defendant had not done an act charged.

R v J

Successful prosecution of drug supply involving the defence of modern slavery.

R v H

Natasha represented the first defendant in a multi-handed affray trial which involved the throwing of missiles and what the prosecution alleged to be indiscriminate violence. The defendants were acquitted.

R v AG

Natasha’s client, a care worker, was found not guilty of ill treatment following trial at which the vulnerable complainant and eyewitnesses were cross examined. 

R v K

The jury found Natasha’s client not guilty of coercive and controlling behaviour, assault, and threats to kill following trial. 

R v W and H

Prosecution of two defendants involved in the running of a Class A drug line involving expert evidence including on cell-site and DNA. Both were convicted after trial.

R v JC 

Natasha represented the second defendant who was charged with aggravated burglary following the home invasion of an elderly couple.

R v C

Natasha prosecuted a defendant charged with the importation of over £1m worth of cocaine from abroad ultimately leading to a sentence of 8 years imprisonment.

R v H

Natasha prosecuted a company director for a number of dishonesty offences including fraud following his actions which had come to light shortly before the collapse of the business. Her involvement included advising on charges, evidence, strategy and sentence including confiscation proceedings.

R v P

Prosecution of assault causing grievous bodily harm upon a vulnerable person by a defendant who at the time was responsible for that person’s safety and well-being. 

 

Professional discipline

NMC v EM

Natasha successfully argued that her client was not currently impaired following admissions to all charges, including dishonesty, that had an important contextual background which was brought out through the registrant’s evidence and submissions.

NMC v J

The case was dismissed at the close of the NMCs case where Natasha successfully argued that her client had no case to answer.

NMC v G

Facts alleging sexual assault of a colleague were found not proved after extensive cross examination of the complainant. The Registrant was therefore able to resume their long and successful practice.

NMC v CJ

The Registrant admitted one charge. Natasha successfully argued that her client had no case to answer on four further charges, and the facts of one remaining charge was found not proved. Natasha further successfully argued that the admitted charge was not misconduct and Natasha’s client was able to keep her reputation as an exemplary professional following an investigation and subsequent proceedings that had spanned 10 years. 

 

Court of Appeal

R v M

Appeal against sentence- whether the Crown Court was right to impose a restraining order on acquittal 

R v A

Appeal against sentence- arguing that the Crown Court erred in declining to suspend the sentence imposed. The case gives general guidance on the use of the drug supply sentencing guidelines where the substance held out to be supplied is not in fact a controlled drug. 

Education
  • 2018: Bar Professional Training Course, City Law School 
  • 2016: Graduate Diploma in Law, University of Law
  • 2014: BA Criminal Justice and Criminology, University of Leeds
Scholarships and Prizes
  • 2017: Mansfied Scholarship, Lincoln’s Inn
  • 2017: Hardwicke Entrance Award, Lincoln’s Inn
  • 2014: University of Leeds, dissertation prize
Professional Appointments and Memberships
  • CPS External Advocates Panel – Grade 2
  • Government Legal Department Junior Junior scheme

Professional Memberships

  • The Young Fraud Lawyers Association
  • Women in Criminal Law