Mauro Maselli LLB
- Business Defence
- Crime and Defence
- Health & Safety
- Motor Offences
Mauro qualified as a Barrister in 2007, having previously practiced as a Solicitor. His primary area of practice is crime. He appears mainly in the Crown Court and represents a wide variety of clients for all types of offences.
Mauro has experience in Prison Law, representing prisoners at adjudications and parole board hearings. He additionally provides representation before the Mental Health Review Tribunal (MHRT) and is an accredited member of the Law Society Mental Health Panel.
Mauro has also been appointed to sit on the Education Independent Appeal Panel, is a qualified Pupil Supervisor and is a Barrister member of the Police and Court Duty Scheme.
Legal 500 Recommended Lawyer
In 2018, Mauro was again recommended by the Legal 500 in the following area of his expertise:
R v B: (2014 Lincoln CC, sole defence Counsel). Death by dangerous driving.
R v B & ors: (2014 Peterborough CC, sole defence Counsel). Large scale affray within prison setting.
R v M & ors: (2014 Canterbury CC, sole defence Counsel). People trafficking and related money laundering offences.
R v S: (2013 Aylesbury CC, sole defence Counsel). Death by dangerous driving.
R v J:  EWCA Crim 2429: Affray. Appeal against sentence.
R v H: (2012, Peterborough CC, sole defence Counsel). Trading standards. Rogue builders targeting elderly customers.
R v P: (2011, Peterborough CC, sole defence Counsel). Possession with intent to supply Class A drug.
R v G: (2011, Peterborough CC, sole defence Counsel). Cultivation of Cannabis.
R v R & ors: (2011, Cambridge CC, sole defence Counsel). Large scale conspiracy to convert criminal property by way of cloning upmarket stolen vehicles. Involved extensive use of expert mobile phone cell citing evidence. Included contested POCA hearing.
R v O & ors: (2011, Huntingdon CC, sole defence Counsel). Perverting Course of Justice by way of attempting to bribe prosecution witness.
R v K and ors: (2010, Central Criminal Courts, sole defence Counsel). Violent home invasion robbery, involved the use of a “chemical cosh”. Case included: Expert evidence re DNA and footmarks.
R v J: (2010, Huntingdon CC, sole defence Counsel). Defendant charged with Trespass with Intent to Rape. Defendant deemed unfit to plead. Fact finding hearing, concluded by medical expert giving evidence on issue of hospital order disposal.
R v Q and ors : (2009, Peterborough CC, Sole Defence Counsel). Multi-handed S.18. Use of improvised weapon (plank of wood) to cause serious injury to victim.
R v B: (2008, St. Albans CC, Junior Defence Counsel). Fraud of old persons by way of trickery/inducement in order to sell property at below market value. Case involved considerable covert evidence.