Mohammed Sajid Bismillah

Mohammed joined Tuckers Solicitors as a Police Station Advisor in November 2016 having successfully completed the Legal Practice Course. Mohammed undertook his training contract with the firm, under the close supervision of Mr Nick Inge, who has been imparting his extensive experience and wealth of knowledge.

Mohammed is a highly organised legal professional with over 5 years’ experience exclusively in criminal defence work with a niche in dealing with sexual offence cases. Mohammed’s experience includes in-depth research and complex and high profile case preparation. His straightforward, thorough and approachable style, excellent bedside manner and knowledge of the law make the perfect combination. Mohammed is known for his relationship management, trial advocacy, negotiation and creative problem solving skills.

Mohammed is very passionate about legal academia. He was the LexisNexis Student Associate for BPP Waterloo. In his spare time he enjoys playing badminton, going to the gym and reading books on history, politics, philosophy, jurisprudence, psychology and law.


R – v – SW – discontinued at the Crown Court after representations. SW charged with possession of bladed article. Incident happened in a cul-de-sac where SW was reported by members of the public to be using a sharp pointed object to attack his neighbour. Matter proceeded to Crown Court and discontinued after arraignment.

R – v – TL – offered no evidence after service of Defence Statement. TL and others were charged with burglary (dwelling). Total value of goods was £7,000.

R – v – RA – out of court disposal after representations. RA, a youth, was charged with section 5 public order. RA threatened to stab complainant with a knife. Crown accepted a letter of apology from RA.

R – v – DR – conditional discharge. DR was charged with assault by beating of an emergency worker. Incident happened late at night. Police were called to a disturbance at a night club. A group of males, of which DR was a part, approached officers in an aggressive manner ending in DR punching an officer in the face.

R – v – GT – acquitted. GT charged under s.172 RTA. Successfully argued statutory defence that it was not reasonably practicable for GT to have received the notice.

R – v – TM – acquitted. TM was charged with theft, assault and criminal damage all against the same complainant. Case involved a non-defendant bad character application. Complainant alleged that TM attacked him whilst he was on the phone in an Iceland car park.

R – v – PB – acquitted of four rapes and common assault. PB was arrested in November 2016 on suspicion of multiple rapes and common assault. Represented PB at the police station advising to tender a detailed prepared statement denying the offence. Persisted and fought with the Crown for fair disclosure. Case involved complex bad character, s.8 and s.41 applications. Described by Counsel as “assiduous, a lawyer who leaves no stone unturned.”

R – v – PS – acquitted. The complainant was discovered by members of the public unconscious in an alleyway after having had sexual intercourse with PS following an evening of heavy drinking. Allegation that she was unable to consent due to state of intoxication rejected by jury. Case preparation included extensive research on drunken consent and instructing a number of experts.

R – v – FVS – acquitted. Client accused of historic sexual abuse by a serving DC in the Child Abuse Investigation Team. The complainant alleged that FVS had sexually assaulted her when she was 8 years old (now 42). The complainant’s credibility would have been automatically enhanced in the eyes of any jury given she was a serving DC. Prepared the case from the point of charge to acquittal.

R – v – TLL ( First Smart Motorway Case in the UK ) – prepared complex case involving multiple traffic and toxicology experts. Charged with multiple counts of causing death by dangerous driving, found guilty of a single count of causing death by careless driving.

R – v – KM – acquitted. KM was released on license after having been convicted of murder. KM’s license was for an indeterminate period. Shortly after being released, KM was arrested, charged and prosecuted for threats to kill and harassment.

R – v – AE – entire prosecution case rendered inadmissible. AE was charged with racially aggravated common assault and assault by beating. Drafted and served a detailed defence statement with specific disclosure requests which the Crown failed to respond to. This was used as basis to successfully argue promissory estoppel and have the entire prosecution case rendered inadmissible under s78.

R – v – MS – acquitted. MS was charged with criminal damage and possession of an offensive weapon. There was forensic evidence placing MS at the scene. Drafted and served a detailed defence statement and in spite of the forensic evidence a submission of no case to answer was accepted by the Court.


MFA – police issued MFA with a harassment warning in November 2017. In December 2017 MFA contacted X, was interviewed and accepted a caution. In January 2018 the police wanted to question MFA for allegedly attempting to contact X again. Before the interview I made a series of representations to the Detective Sergeant as a result of which MFA was issued with a further harassment warning.

AG – AG was arrested on suspicion of interference with a motor vehicle, criminal damage, theft and breach of bail. The evidence against AG was overwhelming in that he was found by police asleep in the vehicle he had interfered with. There was CCTV and a statement from an independent witness which corroborated the same. Proceeded to make a series of representations to the Detective Sergeant with a view to getting the entire matter NFA’d.  AG was NFA’d without an interview.

IP – double murder and GBH.

MD – Terrorism matter which resulted in the suspect being interviewed in an ABE room as opposed to Southwark Police Station.