Inquest into the death of Johnson [2025]
Article 2 inquest into death of moped rider during police pursuit engaging extensive inquiry into police protocols and systems. Representing officer in charge.
Kevin is a senior practitioner with particular expertise in criminal law, inquests and public inquiries, professional discipline, and all matters relating to police law. He is ranked as a leading practitioner in Chambers UK 2025 and Legal 500 2025 in crime, inquests and inquiries, police law and professional discipline.
He leads in landmark judicial reviews shaping police law and professional discipline regulation, advises the Police Federation nationally and is routinely instructed in high profile cases of media interest.
Kevin is ranked as a leading practitioner in inquests and inquires in both Chambers UK 2025 and the Legal 500 2025. acts for interested persons in Coroners’ Inquests, specialising in but not limited to deaths in custody. Kevin is a former Assistant Coroner. whose considerable experience as advocate in jury inquests combines with his specialist knowledge of emergency services procedures and operational policing to provide the particular skills to give an advantageous edge for this specialist work.
Article 2 inquest into death of moped rider during police pursuit engaging extensive inquiry into police protocols and systems. Representing officer in charge.
Reopened Article 2 Old Bailey inquest to determine if officers tipped off murderers or breached Osman duties re 21 year old murder of young woman shot when leaving police station. Representing suspected officers.
Death in custody of young Black male stopped for speeding and arrested for drugs offences who dies in hospital post arrest. National media scrutiny.
Representing police ‘Prevent’ officers engaged with and responsible for terrorist Usman Khan before and at the time of attacks at Fishmonger’s Hall and London Bridge.
Article 2 inquest into death under police restraint of individual exhibiting signs of Acute Behavioural Disturbance. Representing police officers applying the restraint.
Inquest into death of vulnerable elderly gentleman in RTC shortly after police contact having been reported missing.
Article 2 inquest into death of pedestrian during police response driving and comms systems.
Representing police officer and detention officer at the centre of a case concerning the death of homeless man outside a police station in the cold after his ejection from the station and locking of the doors. The case attracted national press interest.
Swallowing drugs (eg Ullah), release from custody absent mental health assessment (eg O’Rourke), Mental Health Act processes and remands (eg Church)
Kevin is Head of Chambers’ Professional Discipline Practice Group and was awarded ‘Best Professional Discipline Junior’ at the UK Bar Awards, 2019. He is ranked as a leading practitioner in Band 1 in both Chambers UK 2025 and the Legal 500 2025 and is quoted as ‘increasingly regarded as a leading authority, if not the authority, in matters relating to police misconduct’. Only a limited view of Kevin’s considerable experience in professional discipline can be given in the notable cases section many of which attracted intense media attention. It would be difficult to name a more experienced defence advocate in the field. He provides specialist advice, drafting and advocacy in disciplinary as well as performance hearings and IOPC cases. He is instructed to advise the Police Federation and lead on initiatives nationally on discrete issues of law of general national importance. He gives lectures and training on the law and procedure. Kevin also acts and advises at Police Appeals Tribunal stage and judicial review, acting for the accused officers in important cases that have shaped the law in this area summarised in the Judicial Review cases section.
High profile use of force case subject to TV documentary concerning taser use on young Black man. Acquitted on racial discrimination allegations.
High profile misconduct hearing of young female Muslim role model police officer facing allegations of racist and discriminator tweets before and after becoming a police officer.
Multiple complex legal arguments touching upon Equality Act 2010, novel legal argument on applicability of honesty and integrity standard to alleged sexual misconduct and inappropriate comments and behaviour when off duty.
Defending in allegations of discriminatory practices predicated upon adverse Employment Tribunal findings.
Appearing opposite KC and junior in sensitive and difficult case concerning alleging serious sexual misconduct.
Defending allegations of breach of Orders & Instructions following appearance on Big Brother reality show.
Kevin is ranked as a leading practitioner in criminal law in both the Legal 500 2025 and in Chambers UK 2025. He has over 25 years unbroken experience in serious criminal cases including but not limited to:
Defending corruption charges linked to organised crime.
Defending firearms assault resulting in life changing injuries.
Defending police officer rape allegations.
Treasury Counsel prosecuted high profile use of force case subject of viral videos and national press.
Awarded ‘The Times Lawyer of the Week’. Defending KC prosecuted officer acquitted of inflicting GBH upon a man left paralysed after use of taser. Sensitive case with expert evidence and national press coverage.
Defending police officer acquitted of dangerous driving following serious collision when travelling at speed in response to the Streatham terrorist attacks, widespread national press publicity.
Leading Counsel. Perverting and fraud trial reserved for trial by High Court. KC and junior prosecuted. Suspended sentence imposed engaging Article 8, and citing UN conventions on women’s and child’s rights.
Class A drug supply and money laundering conspiracy totalling 100s of kg and millions of pounds. Case rested upon Encrochat evidence – the previously secure mobile phone system employed by criminals but hacked by French law enforcement and shared under international cooperation between agencies. Also appearing in Court of Appeal on AG’s reference. Confiscation proceedings followed.
Conviction overturned on appeal to Court of Appeal on basis of fresh evidence prosecution failed to disclose, establishing it is a ‘short step’ from concluding that non-defendant bad character fresh evidence would have been admissible under s100(1)(b) CJA 2003 to satisfying the test for appeal against conviction.
200kg Cannabis importation.
Defending allegations of perverting the course of justice and fraud re false complaints of controlling and coercive behaviour, High Court judge presiding.
Defending allegations concerning familial rape.
Following a Masters Degree at Oxford in commercial law Kevin took pupillage at the Commercial Bar (20 Essex Street) before moving to the Criminal Bar to employ his advocacy skills. He is experienced in acting for prosecution and defence, and in cases brought by the FCA, SFO and CPS. His approach is based on thorough early preparation and mastery of the detail. He is experienced in providing advice at all stages of the process from pre-charge to large prosecutions. Notable cases include
Defending former Chair of the Association of UK Payment Institutions re Money Laundering, wrongfully retaining credit and ML Regulations breaches. £850,000 and involving more than 60 victims underlying boiler room laundering proceeds through money service bureau payments to China. Further charge in relation to allowing £265,000 payment in breach of SCPO.
Led by Neil Saunders. Advising, drafting, and acting from pre-charge stage for FSA in significant insider trading prosecutions.
Fraud by abuse of position. Defending senior financial products manager for large international bank on charges of fraud by abuse of position concerning use of privileged information to steal customer identities in order to access their accounts.
SFO Ponzi fraud. Junior counsel defending only acquitted defendant in a Category 2 SFO fraud with many aspects, including a Ponzi fraud in relation to investment in a gold mine, share dealing, banking instruments, insurance and reinsurance. A complex 24 count indictment evidenced by hundreds of thousands of pages of material was drastically reduced following successful dismissal arguments conceived through meticulous preparation. The trial at Liverpool Crown Court featured numerous experts, in particular from the scientific and financial fields and evidence by live link from abroad. Kevin used his familiarity with electronic evidence to negotiate this case.
Largest detected fraud against NHS at its time. Kevin defended in this case concerning the largest ever payroll fraud detected against the NHS, at its centre a fraudster listed as one of the 10 most wanted criminals in the country. The payroll manager at King’s College hospital was recruited to create a ghost workforce by exploiting a loophole in the electronic payroll system. Conspiracy and money laundering charges were preferred by the Crown whose case was heavily document based. The entire trail from initial recruitment, booking of staff, timesheets, ‘prism’ system entries, matchnet reports was created and faked, expert computer evidence was relied upon.
Kevin is prominent in the law reports having led and appeared in landmark cases in the field of police regulation over many years. He is ranked Band 1 in Police law in the Legal 500 2025 and Band 2 in Police Law (Defendant) in Chambers UK 2025. Kevin recently took the national lead in responding to the practice of use of vetting as a route to dismissal, bringing test cases, consulting on statutory guidance and new regulations, and leading the root and branch winning test case with nationwide consequences including influencing new laws. He conducted test cases on the novel issues of restrictions on private life, as well as jurisdiction over pre-attestation conduct both in England and Wales and Northern Ireland. His cases have stretched the entire breadth of novel regulatory issues in the field for decades.
A most consequential case in police regulation. Root and branch test case challenging use of vetting withdrawal as basis for dismissing police officers. Wining on all grounds with nationwide consequences affecting new legislation.
Representing 4 national police federations and over 150,000 officers intervening in Court of Appeal of Northern Ireland in test case determining application of discipline regulations to pre-attestation conduct. Called to NI Bar.
Intervention on behalf of PFEW in England and Wales test case on jurisdiction as to pre-attestation conduct.
Claimant for judicial review irrationality challenge to removal of vetting for unproven pre-attestation conduct.
Court of Appeal. Claimant in judicial review for officer in test case on issue of force imposing restrictions upon private life – whether power to impose, whether compatible and justified as Art 8 infringement and the principle of legality.
Leading Counsel versus KC and junior claiming judicial review in test case concerning dismissal through device of removing vetting.
Judicial Review acting for IP resisting claim seeking to quash IOPC decisions of no case to answer and not to recommend disciplinary action against officer for gross misconduct.
Advising and acting in respect of use of Regulation 13 Police Regulations 2013 to dispense with services of probationer constables where unlawful by reason of requirement to utilise conduct regulations and associated protections.
Meaning of ‘unreasonable’ and whether Rule 4(4)(a) appeals raise an estoppel given absence of remittal power
Contesting the existence of the equivalent of a Victim’s Right of Review in police misconduct cases upon an investigation conclusion of no case to answer.
Judicial Review concerning recently developing line of authority on imposing sanctions re applying Fuglers as decided in Roscoe and West Mids Officer A.
Kevin has consistently appeared in judicial reviews in previous years, including Moore [2007] EWHC 2715 vires of AG’s Guidance; Hayman [2008] EWHC 2191 Standard of Proof; Khan [2010] EWHC 2339 proceedings following criminal acquittal; Monger [2013] EWHC 455 dispensing of Special Constables; Naulls [2013] EWHC 1684 appeals against dismissal, costs and back pay; Demetriou [2015] EWHC 593 power to reopen IPCC final report; Meadows [2018] EWHC 2997 test for no case to answer; Baxter [2020] CO/3849/2020 retention following dishonesty findings
Emma Makepeace
Deputy Senior Clerk
“Kevin is one of the leading junior barristers in police discipline. In terms of black letter law he is second to none.” Chambers UK 2025: Professional Discipline
“Kevin knows more about police practice and the implementation of those things when they morph into criminal proceedings than any other lawyer in England & Wales.” Legal 500 2025: Crime
“His authority in this field is second to none. He brings a cool detachment, a surgical analysis, and a perfect eye for the killer detail to all that he does. He is at the very top of his game at the moment.” Legal 500 2025: Crime
“Kevin is increasingly regarded as a leading authority, if not the authority, in matters relating to police misconduct.” Legal 500 2025: Police Law
“Knows the law inside and out.” Chambers UK 2024: Professional Discipline
“Kevin has a razor-sharp intellect. He is a fearsome courtroom advocate, a ruthless cross-examiner and a stellar black letter lawyer.” Legal 500 2024: Police Law
“Kevin has a piercing intellect and is an exceptional lawyer who always has the latest caselaw at his fingertips.” Legal 500 2024: Crime
“Kevin has a razor-sharp intellect, and is an unstoppable force on his feet. Most opponents wilt before him.” Legal 500 2024: Inquests and Inquiries
“He is a fearsome courtroom advocate, a ruthless cross-examiner and a stellar black letter lawyer.” Legal 500 2024: Police Law
“Kevin has an exceptional tactical brain, is meticulous in his case preparation, and has an unparalleled eye for detail.” Chambers UK 2023: Police Law
His tactical knowledge is immense and he has the ability to get to grips with a case in a manner that inevitably results in victory.” Chambers UK 2023: Police Law
“Kevin has an exceptional tactical brain, is meticulous in his case preparation and his eye for detail is unparalleled.” Legal 500 2023: Police Law
“He is fiercely intellectual and presents his submissions in a clear and persuasive manner.” Chambers UK 2022: Crime
“A great tactician.” Chambers UK 2022: Crime
“An outstanding advocate and cross-examiner. The best in the area of police misconduct, always calm and understated.” Chambers UK 2022: Professional Discipline
“He’s exceptionally good.” Chambers UK 2022: Professional Discipline
“He is meticulous in his preparation, works very hard and finds every good point – it always seems that he has a strong case.” Legal 500 2022: Police Law
“Brilliantly clever, hard as nails, relentless in pursuit desired by his clients — he is admired and feared in equal measure by his opponents.” Legal 500 2022: Crime
Kevin is pretty much universally acknowledged as the leading junior in the UK in police discipline cases.” Legal 500 2022: Crime
“Clever, tenacious and an extremely effective advocate who produces devastating lines of cross-examination.” Chambers UK 2021: Crime
“Highly intelligent, all over the law and a very compelling, succinct barrister.” Chambers UK 2021: Police Law
“A brilliant all-rounder. He’s a very capable lawyer and advocate, and his analysis stands out.” Chambers UK 2021: Police Law
“A persuasive, tactically shrewd advocate.” Legal 50 2021: Police Law
“Incredibly well regarded, and very active in matters involving the Met.” Chambers UK 2021: Professional Discipline
“Highly intelligent, all over the law and a very compelling, succinct barrister.” Chambers UK 2021: Police Law
“A brilliant all-rounder. He’s a very capable lawyer and advocate, and his analysis stands out.” Chambers UK 2021: Police Discipline
“A persuasive, tactically shrewd advocate.” Legal 500 2021: Police Law
“Kevin has a marvellous ability for getting to grips with the most complicated scenarios. He is extremely hard working and never allows the amount of material to get on top of him. He is remarkably good with clients and offers a great reassuring presence to all involved in the case.” Legal 500 2021: Crime
“He is on the ball, makes good points and is the master of his brief.” Chambers UK 2020: Professional Discipline
“He defends officers in high-profile cases.” Legal 500 2020: Police Law
“He’s excellent in the way he prepares cases. He is meticulous and has very good analysis and strategy.” Chambers UK 2019: Professional Discipline
“He’s excellent in the way he prepares cases. He is meticulous and has very good analysis and strategy.” Chambers UK 2019: Professional Discipline
“Exceptionally thorough. An excellent advocate who provides first-class representation to police officers who find themselves in difficulties.” Chambers UK 2018: Professional Discipline
“Very switched-on.” Legal 500 2018: Police Law
“He is unpretentious, with excellent client care skills.” Legal 500 2017: Police Law
“He’s very thorough and good strategically. His written work is excellent and he has a real ability to out-think the opposition. He’s always meticulously prepared for a case.” Chambers UK 2017: Professional Discipline
“A regular for police appeal tribunal work.” Legal 500 2016: Professional Discipline
“Combines strong skills in general crime and fraud with experience in a wide range of police disciplinary work. He’s well versed in handling sophisticated judicial review cases. His cross-examination is great and presentationally he is very difficult to beat. He strikes a really nice balance. He’s a very good, hard-nosed defence barrister, and a good advocate who is an immensely hard worker.” Chambers UK 2016: Professional Discipline
“His preparation is faultless and his cross-examination is excellent.” Legal 500 2015: Professional Discipline
“He is devastating in cross-examination and has a rapier-sharp mind. He is very measured and is excellent at dealing with very complex matters.” Chambers UK 2015: Professional Discipline
“Accomplished at handling police disciplinary cases as well as financial services regulatory mandates.” Legal 500 2014: Professional Discipline & Regulatory Law
“He often handles high-profile police misconduct cases. He is very good, very thorough and very hard-working, and he comes incredibly well prepared.” Chambers UK 2014: Professional Discipline
“His grasp of the area and understanding of the issues in each case is top class.” Legal 500 2013: Professional Discipline
“Kevin Baumber is extremely thorough and has a very good mind for assimilating detail. He represents police officers before the IPCC and in disciplinary hearings, inquests, appeals and judicial reviews.” Chambers UK 2013: Professional Discipline
“Kevin Baumber is ‘first class’; very clever and hard-working.” Legal 500 2010: Crime
Degrees
Awards
In promotion of diversity at the Bar Kevin is a mentor with ‘Bridging the Bar’, and other mentoring schemes, including actions of his own initiative as well as having acted as an Inns of Court Diversity trainer and attendances at his local primary and secondary schools running innovated trials he has written of R v Jack Beanstalk on theft and criminal damage charges, alongside trials of Macbeth and Frankenstein’s Monster.
I, Kevin Baumber, am a data controller and can be contacted at 3 Raymond Buildings, Gray’s Inn, London WC1R 5BH or by telephone on 020 7400 6400 or by email at kevin.baumber@3rblaw.com. My Data Protection Policy can be found below.
All personal data that I process is for the purposes of providing legal services, conducting conflict-checks, marketing, defending potential complaints, legal proceedings or fee disputes, keeping anti-money laundering records, training other barristers and pupils and when providing work-shadowing opportunities, and/or exercising a right to a lien. The types of data I process vary upon the nature of the legal matter in relation to which I am engaged to advise, but can include names, contact details, biographic details, records of service, training records and ‘special category personal data’ (such as details of racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, health, sex life, criminal convictions and proceedings).
Depending upon the circumstances of the case, the legal bases upon which I process personal data are (i) the performance of a contract to which the data subject is a party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract, (ii) the processing is necessary to comply with legal obligations to which I am subject, or (iii) the processing is necessary for the legitimate interests set out above, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subjects which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child. When I rely on (iii) legitimate interests, my ‘Legitimate Interests Assessment’ can be found here. When I process data which has not be obtained directly from the data subject (e.g. personal data contained in evidential materials), it will have been supplied to me as part of my instructions in circumstances covered by legal professional privilege.
Depending upon the circumstances of the case, I may share the personal data with:
I retain personal data for no longer than 8 years after the case has come to an end or as otherwise required by law.
I do not intend to transfer data to any country which is not either within the European Union, ‘white listed’ by the EU or otherwise permitted by EU law (e.g. to the USA under the provisions of the ‘Privacy Shield’).
Under the GDPR, data subjects whose personal data I process have the right to request from me access to, and rectification or erasure of, their personal data, the right to the restriction of processing concerning them, the right to object to processing as well as the right to data portability. Data subjects also have the right to lodge a complaint with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ico.org.uk).
In cases where there is a contract between me and the data subject, the provision of personal data is a contractual requirement and the data subject is obliged to provide the personal data in order that I can supply legal services. A failure to provide such data may mean that I will not be able to provide the legal services.
Rev 1.1 – 24.05.2018
Kevin Baumber is qualified to accept instructions direct from clients under the Bar Council’s Public Access Scheme. This means that members of the public who seek specialist advice can come direct to him. In addition, he welcomes instructions from solicitors, in-house law departments, qualified foreign lawyers, and clients licensed by the Bar Council to give instructions direct to barristers under the Bar Council’s Licensed Access Scheme.
For further information please contact our Clerks.
| Address | 3 Raymond Buildings, Gray’s Inn, London WC1R 5BH |
|---|---|
| DX | 237 LDE |
| Opening hours | 08:30 – 18:30 |
| Telephone | +44 (0)20 7400 6400 |
|---|---|
| clerks@3rblaw.com | |
| Senior clerk | Kevin Baumber |
