Disgraced Barrister Jo Sidhu KC Gave Key Evidence That Sent Man to Prison

CANARY WHARF, U.K. - June 25, 2025 - PRLog -- A growing campaign is calling for the immediate review and overturning of the 2015 conviction of Jason Juul (formerly Jason Place), after it emerged that disbarred barrister Jo Sidhu KC—whose testimony was pivotal to the case—lied under oath and misrepresented his character to the jury.
(2) Top lawyer 'preyed on young women entering law' - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ar6nLYZq6M&t=5s)


Mr Juul served five years in prison after being found guilty of stalking Sidhu, a then-prominent QC, who claimed to be the victim of a malicious online harassment campaign. Sidhu painted himself in court as a highly respected legal professional with impeccable integrity—testimony that directly influenced the jury's verdict.

However, in March 2025, the Bar Standards Board disbarred Sidhu for predatory, exploitative conduct towards junior female barristers, exposing a pattern of deception and abuse of power that had persisted for years. The disciplinary ruling directly contradicts the persona Sidhu presented at Mr Juul's trial and raises urgent questions about the safety of the conviction.

"It's now clear the jury were misled by a man who has been revealed as a predator masquerading as a legal role model," said Mr Juul. "I've always said I was trying to expose a dangerous figure in the legal profession. Ten years later, the truth is finally out—but I lost years of my life because no one believed me."

The transcript from Day 2 of the trial reveals how Sidhu was allowed to portray himself as a model of legal ethics, while the defence was barred from cross-examining him on inappropriate conduct—including a phone call to Mr Juul's solicitor, which was the subject of a formal complaint to the Bar Standards Board.

Further concerns are now being raised about the testimony of barrister Ally Howard, who described Sidhu in court as a "mentor" and "good friend." Campaigners fear she, like others, may have been manipulated or coerced into supporting Sidhu's narrative.

The Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC) is currently considering fresh submissions that include:
The transcript of Sidhu's evidence, now shown to be misleading.
https://cowboysolicitors.com/R-v-Place-Day-2-Tuesday17Nov...

The Bar Standards Board's ruling detailing his serious misconduct.
https://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/disciplinary_finding...

Evidence that key character concerns were suppressed from the jury.
Campaigners are now calling for:

Immediate referral of Mr Juul's case to the Court of Appeal.
A public inquiry into other cases involving Sidhu.

Support from investigative journalists, legal charities, and MPs.
"This is not just one wrongful conviction—it's the unmasking of a predator who used the courtroom to silence his accuser," said a spokesperson for the campaign. "The legal system must reckon with this."