Categories:Crime,UK

Former 39 Essex Street silk guilty of £600,000 VAT fraud

  • Print
  • Comments (16)

Readers' comments (16)

  • Rohan was a fraud silk at a leading set. This means he was highly gifted and that his explanation was highly implausible within the context of his skill set and intelligence. The jury clearly agreed with this view and not even Mukul Chawla QC (a brilliant man) could convince them otherwise. It is v sad.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • While a 18-month VAT straddle may be useful for advance funding of pro bono cases, it did not occur to this top flight barrister did to plead this case. Is it academic to inquire whether his former clients might now be justified in demanding refunds? I would.
    In any event, a Magic Circle firm could have discretely distributed a backhander. That's what they do best. Think Kapthung nand you'll get it in a flash.
    Ave

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • One issue which has yet to arise is, bearing in mind the QC appointments process and the supposed consideration of your dealings with HMRC, how was this man appointed a QC?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • It is crazy for a fraud silk to suggest that he thought VAT would be paid from chambers' fees. He has decades of experience and knows the basics of how the system works. Not to mention he could easilyhave checked or just read his contract with chambers. I'm surprised he ran this argument rather than just pleading guilty.
    I can't believe the comments of people who think he was convicted because of his minority status. Being an ethnic minority does not give you a free pass to commit blatent tax fraud.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Madness not to plead guilty on the facts as reported.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • How many times during the rest of his life will he re-live that moment when he decided to cross the line? The moment he made a conscious decision not to account for the VAT that was due, and to become a criminal.
    It's really hard to imagine why he did it. He was clearly earning good money, so it can hardly have been financial pressure. The only logical explanation was pure greed. If so, I really have no sympathy for him, particularly as he appears to have been not just greedy but arrogant and stupid as well as evidenced by his not guilty plea and laughable defence.
    Once he's locked up and had access to the prison computers perhaps he will post an explanation on the Lawyer's website to enlighten us.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

Mandatory Required Fields

Mandatory

Comments that are in breach or potential breach of our terms and conditions in particular clause 8, may not be published or, if published, may subsequently be taken down. In addition we may remove any comment where a complaint is made in respect of it. These actions are at our sole discretion.

  • Print
  • Comments (16)