Benjamin Temple

Practice Profile

Ben Temple is an experienced senior junior barrister with a thriving practice in both the prosecution and defence of serious criminal trials and is universally acknowledged as an extremely effective and skilful advocate.

His practice is primarlily concentrated upon cases involving homicide with over 30 murder and manslaughter trials undertaken over recent years. Ben has also extensive experience of cases involving serious sexual offending, financial crime, cybercrime, terrorism and large scale conspiracies involving drugs, firearms and armed robberies.

He has appeared in the House of Lords / Supreme Court and has a wealth of experience in the Appellate Courts.

Ben's Privacy Policy can be downloaded here.

News

• R v AO [Central Criminal Court] 2022

  GBH & other charges

  Defended in R. v. AO, Central Criminal Court: sole defendant (of 4) to be acquitted by the jury of all charges: conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm, conspiracy to possess a firearm with intent to endanger life, violent disorder.  This case related to a linked series of shootings.

• R v IB [Central Criminal Court] 2022

  Money Laundering

  Defended in R. v. IB: 2022, Central Criminal Court at Nightingale Court: acquitted of money laundering and jury could not agree on multiple charges of offering Class A drugs.

• R v AB [Newcastle Crown Court] 2021

  Death by Careless Driving

  Defended in R. v. AB, Newcastle Crown Court, death by careless driving. 

• R v C [Woolwich Crown Court] 2020

  Supply of Class A Drugs

  Defended in R. v. C, Woolwich Crown Court, conspiracy to supply Class A drugs: sole defendant (of 9) to be acquitted.

• R v MB [Wood Green Crown Court] 2020

  Rape

  Defended in R. v. MB, Wood Green Crown Court, multiple complainant rape case.

View All Cases

Notable Cases

• R. v. G; R. v. J [2009] UKHL 13; Archbold 2013: 25-67 2009

  Use of Articles for purposes of Terrorism

  Mark Heywood QC leading Ben Temple for the Prosecution at first instance, the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords where David Perry QC was also instructed.

  J was found to be in possession of an extensive library of religious, political, ideological, military and extreme Islamist material some of which had an express terrorist purpose, digitally stored on his laptop, I-Pod, telephone and numerous digital disks comprising several hundred hours of audio and video material and several thousand pages of documentation.   J was charged with possessing articles for a purpose connected with terrorism, contrary to section 57(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000.  J pleaded guilty to four counts contrary to section 58 of the Act.  The Court of Appeal then handed down judgment in R. v. K [2008] EWCA Crim.185 on the point of reasonable excuse under section 58(3).  J, having applied successfully to vacate his pleas, claiming erroneous legal advice in the light of R. v. K, re-entered not guilty pleas at a preparatory hearing in the course of which the Recorder of Birmingham, regarding himself bound by R. v. K, ruled on a question of law formulated by the Crown that, by reference to R. v. K, under section 58 where a reasonable excuse is raised the prosecution must prove a terrorist purpose.

  Leave to appeal to the House of Lords was granted.  The three certified questions raised substantial, complex issues.  The concept of reasonable excuse had to be considered across numerous statutory contexts.  The Crown’s appeals (G and J) were allowed and J, a year after he had first done so, pleaded guilty to four offences contrary to section 58.