Top tax barrister Robert Venables KC, 78, of Old Square Tax Chambers is currently facing three counts of dishonestly cheating the public revenue in criminal proceedings before a jury at Southwark Crown Court.
Our previous reporting of this case:
✍️ Jan 2025: Barrister accused of falsifying tax returns – the indictment revealed
✍️ May 2026: Trial date set for barrister accused of falsifying tax returns
✍️ May 2026: Barrister’s barrister tells jury: “There is nothing legally wrong with avoiding tax and exploiting loopholes”
✍️ May 2026: Wise gardener gives evidence in KC Tax Cheat case
Please buy us a coffee to support crowd-funded journalism
Reporting by freelance journalist Daniel Cloake
Robert Venables (left) with barrister Stuart Biggs KC outside Southwark Crown Court
Amanda Jane West, a self-employed accountant, gave evidence for 40 minutes this morning.
The jury heard that she had qualified in 1985 but started providing services to Key Haven Publications Ltd in 2007.
“Is that the publisher of tax books?” asked Mr Julian Christopher KC, on behalf of the prosecution.
Yes, replied Ms West, who added that on the interview panel was Robert Venables, Michael Venables (his brother), and their current accountant.
Two years later Ms West started providing services to Mr Venables beyond Key Haven, which the jury was told involved “analysing bank statements, and putting the details onto a spreadsheet“. This was “so the donkey work would have been done for [Venables]” when it came to the end of each tax year.
Asked questions about how often she was paid Ms West explained she invoiced every two months as the amounts were too small otherwise.
The court heard she had initially compiled timesheets to “see how much time I did for him and how much time for the trusts. It almost came out at 50/50 and that’s the percentage we applied all the way through“.
We were told a cheque, for 50% of the fee earned, would be paid as part of her “normal self-employment“, and a cheque for the other 50% would be raised, and “that would go into my personal account as an additional form of income“.
Both cheques were identical, save for handwriting, and came from Mr Venables’ chambers account, referred to as “the number four account“.
The court was shown a number of tax returns filed by Ms West. In 2015/2016 “Income from trust” was shown as £2,899. The same amount had been included in her self-employment turnover as part of the 50/50 arrangement.
In a section asking for more information we were told it said “Gross income from UK trust. No tax deducted – [This] cannot be entered on the trust pages“.
The court was shown that similar statements appeared on her tax returns until 2018/2019 when instead the partnership pages were filled in.
“The structure that was paying me had changed… trusts are not my forte. The law had changed but my role hadn’t” said West.
Under cross-examination from Stuart Biggs KC, representing the defendant, Ms West explained that she would only have contact with Mr Venables “if he had queries“.
Biggs asked, “Would you agree he is fastidious on this?“
“Yes“
“Sometimes to the point of obsession?“
Ms West replied “pedantic is a good word“.
Biggs pressed her further. Her role was “not just getting something in, it has to be right?“
“Yes,” she confirmed.
Did she have any concerns continuing to provide services to him? “None whatsoever“, averring that Venables had always been “fair and honest” in his dealings with her.
The defendant Robert Venables KC, wearing a navy blue suit, sat at the back of the court in an area normally reserved for lawyers, typing notes on a laptop.
The trial continues.
At this hearing the CPS were represented by Julian Christopher KC. Mr Venables was represented by Stuart Biggs KC.
The mouseinthecourt attended Southwark Crown Court on Wednesday 3rd June 2026.
The work on this site is protected by copyright laws and treaties around the world. All such rights are reserved.
You may print off one copy, and may download extracts, of any page(s) from our site for your personal use and you may draw the attention of others within your organisation to content posted on our site.
You must not modify the paper or digital copies of any materials you have printed off or downloaded in any way, and you must not use any illustrations, photographs, video or audio sequences or any graphics separately from any accompanying text.
Our status (and that of any identified contributors) as the authors of content on our site must always be acknowledged.
You must not use any part of the content on our site for commercial purposes without obtaining a licence to do so from us or our licensors.
Mouse in the Court 