Mohammed Omar Saleem

Omar is a Director, a Duty Solicitor and an accredited Police Station Representative.

Omar is the co-founding director of Lexis Solicitors.

Omar has been working within the criminal legal sector for a decade. During this time, Omar has gained a wealth or knowledge and experience by working alongside experienced Kings Counsel and Counsel in high profile criminal case.

Omar has dealt with cases including clients charged with murder, high-value fraud, serious assault case, drug conspiracies, encro chat, drug importations, cases relating to sexual offences including historical offences.

Omar is well known to providing his clients with a service beyond exceptional. Omar is always looking for flaws within the prosecution evidence as well as instructing defence experts to challenge the evidence brought against his clients. Due to this, Omar has a huge following of clients all over the country.

Omar’s Recent Cases 

• R -v- DC: Omar dealt with a case in which he represented a client charged on murder. This was a multi hander case in which 6 defendants had been charged as jointly being involved. The case was before Manchester Crown Court.
• R -v- LR: Omar represented a client charged on 9 counts of conspiracy to supply class A drugs. The evidence in this case was extracted from encro chats. Omar instructed an encro chat expert to challenge the evidence brought against his client.
• R -v- GO: Omar represented a client who was charged on a high profile multi handed drug conspiracy. Due to the extensive evidence in this case, the trial took place over 6 months before Loughborough Crown Court.
• R -v- KM: Omar dealt with a high-profile case in which he dealt with an appeal in relation to his client who had served a 20 year sentence. The basis of the appeal was that the officers in that case had been recently convicted on tampering with evidence and bribery.
• R -v-AA: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged on serious multi handed GBH assault case. In this case the charges were successfully brought down to ABH and the client received a suspended sentence
• R -v- CK: Omar represented a client before Hull Crown Court charged on a multi-handed conspiracy. This was a high-profile case in which most of the evidence relied upon by the crown was cell site and text messages.
• R -v- IK: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was changed with an offence of kidnapping and robbery. The allegation was that the client travelled from London to Hull, from Hull to Grimsby, from Grimsby back to London and then from London to Dover. Due to this the cell site and telephonic evidence was extremely important in this case which was carefully considered.
• R -v- MHH and MI: Omar’s represented 2 clients on this case who were changed with offences of fraud. This case was initially before Westminster Magistrates and later transferred to Leeds Crown Court for trial.
• R -v- IM: Omar’s client was charged with firearm offences; Omar instructed several experts to challenge the forensic evidence in this case.
• R -v- YMR: Omar dealt with case in which his client was a police informant. The client was charged with malicious communication. The case pushed Omar to his limits. Omar stood his grounds and dealt with the case competently. This was one of the most changing cases that Omar had to take on.
• R-v- YM: Omar dealt with a 8 handed case in which the client was charged on conspiracy to supply class A drugs, conspiracy to kidnapping, firearms and offensive weapons. Omar had instructed several experts on this case in order to challenge the prosecution evidence.
• R -v- MFA and AG: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged with conspiracy to supply class A drugs and money laundering charges. The evidence in this case was in excess of 800,000 pages which Omar had to go though in order to prepare a good case for his client.
• R -v- IRA: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged with an offence of rape. On this case Omar instructed cell site experts to not examine the defendant’s phone but also the victims phone in order to show that the alleged rape was consensual as per the defendants instructions.
• R -v- KK & Others: Omar was involved in a multi-handed case in which clients were changed on conspiracy to supply class A drugs and conspiracy to fraud. After having counts dropped against the client, he pleaded guilty at the day of trial and received a suspended sentence.
• R -v- ZAK: Omar’s client was changed with perverting the court of justice before Leeds Crown Court. The evidence in the case was one of cell site. To tackle this, Omar instructed cell site and telephonic experts to challenge the evidence in this case.
• R -v- SH: Omar’s client was changed with section 18 grievous bodily harm. On this case Omar’s client instructed one of the leading Queens Counsel to defend him on a private basis. On this case Omar requested and served with further prosecution evidence which led to an excellent result with the client avoiding a custodial sentence.
• R -v- RO: Omar dealt with a case in which 12 defendants had been charged on a drug conspiracy operation before Teesside Crown Court. Omar had to face many challenges on this case to the point the case ended up at the Court of Appeal.
• R -v- IM & Others: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged on a serious violent offence of s18 GBH. Omar instructed an expert to challenge the CCTV evidence as his client’s account was that he was picked up on a mistake identity basis.
• R -v- MAR: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was before trial at Nottingham Crown Court. Omar had to instruct a Psychiatrist, a Psychologist and an Intermediary to show that his client was not in the right frame of mind when the offence was committed.
• R -v- AS: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged on an offence of perverting the course of Justice before Reading Crown Court. Omar instructed several medical experts on this case in order to show that his client suffered from mental health issues.
• R -v- SA: Omar’s client was changed with an offence of human slavery and appeared before Carlisle Crown Court. The case was one which ended up at the Court of Appeal.
• R -v- MII: Omar’s client was charged on a historical grooming operation before Leeds Crown Court. This was a complex case which required thorough preparation.
• R -v- AR: Omar’s client was charged with historical grooming offences dating back to 2005. Due to the evidence being the victims account only, Omar had to go back into his client’s life and pull through whatever evidence he could to assist his client’s defence.
• R -v- IM: Omar deal with a case in which his client was charged with an offence of murder before Leeds Crown Court. Omar worked alongside one of the top Queens Counsels to prepare his client’s defence.
• R -v- NH & Others: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged on historical allegations. Due to the allegations being historical, Omar had to take detailed accounts of his client’s past life and look into aspects which could assist his defence.
• R -v- RS & Others: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged with several offences of historical rape. On this case Omar instructed several experts to show that his client was not in the right state of mind to provide instructions and stand trial.
• R -v- AR & Others: Omar dealt with a case in which his client was charged on historical allegations of rape. The case was part of Operation Tendersea phase 1.
• R -v- MII & Others: Omar’s client was charged on offences of historical rape. This was part of an ongoing investigation into grooming. Omar’s client was the only one on this case to receive the shortest sentence after trial due to the extensive mitigation put forward.
• R -v- JS: Omar’s client was a prison officer charged with smuggling drugs into prison for inmates. Omar challenge almost everything on this case and concluded that the client had been forced into taking the drugs into prison. The client pleaded guilty on basis and avoided a prison sentence.
• R -v- KA: Omar’s client was charged with serious offences of fraud. In this case the client was alleged to have been portraying himself as a police officer and convincing venerable victims in handing money and gold over to him for safe keeping. There were several defendants on this case.
• R -v- DW: Omar’s client was charged with an offence of possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life. It was alleged that the client had shot at individuals of a rival gang.
• R -v- DM: Omar’s client was charged with an offence of conspiracy to robbery. In this case the client was deemed to have acted under pressure by others. Following a plea on basis and extensive mitigation, the client received a short custodial sentence.
• R -V- JG & Others: Omar’s client was charged on attempted murder in which it was alleged the client had attend a business premises and fired several shots using a loaded shotgun missing the victim inches away.
• R -v- DAJ & Others: Omar’s client was charged on part of a conspiracy to supply class A and B drugs. It was alleged that the client had been selling drugs to undercover police officers. Omar represented 4 clients on this case out of 6.
• R -v- HJ & Others: Omar’s client was charged with offence of importation of class A drugs concealing the drugs into children’s toys. Omar’s client was alleged to be the leader on the case and following a Newton Hearing, his role was brought down reducing his sentence.
• R -v- MM & Others: Omar’s client was charged as part of the conspiracy to import drugs into the UK. On this case Omar successfully managed to sever his client’s case from the remaining group and successfully managed to get his client a suspended sentence. The remaining defendants on this case all received lengthy custodial sentences.
• R -v- CW: Omar’s client was charged with possession of its intent to supply class A and B drugs. This case was heard before Southwark Crown Court. This was a high-profile case; it was found that the client’s partner was the one who was forcing his partner (our client) to sell the drugs and the partner was a high-profile catwalk model for big brands in Dubai.
• R -v- MA: The client was charged with serious s18 GBH offences in which it was alleged that the client had used a knife to slash the victim. Following expert evidence, it was provided that what the prosecution alleged was a knife in the CCTV was in fact the Nike sigh shining on our client’s glove reducing our clients sentence substantially.
• R -v- PO: Omar’s client was charged with rape along with 2 others. It was alleged that all 3 defendants raped the victim who was intoxicated with alcohol. After considering CCTV in depth, it was shown in trial that it was the victim who dragged all three defendants into an alleyway. All 3 clients secured verdicts of not guilty by the Judy following trial.
• R -v- AB: Omar’s client was changed with historical rape following his divorce. The client alleged that his ex-wife had out of spite put these allegations and following trial, we provided this through 18 defence witnesses and the client secured a verdict of not guilty following trial.
• R -v- TB: Omar’s client was charged with offences of fraud and theft from employer. It was alleged that the client had been claiming and transferring funds into his account through the company he was a manger of. After months of gathering evidence, it was shown that the funds transferred into the clients account were his legitimate funds and the case was discontinued by the prosecution and our client being awarded compensation by the company.
• R -v- LD and DS: Case involving the murder of a 4-month-old child. The complexity of the case required 8 medical experts and months of preparation. In this case the case the medical evidence was challenged by the defence.