Full Comment

Ever thought pouring leftover coffee down a drain could land you a £150 fine? Or that feeding a cat could technically be theft? In this episode of Knowledge Full Comment, Edward Grange and Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh dive into some bizarre, obscure, and surprisingly real laws - from environmental offences to electric scooters, horse-drinking rules, and even Polish potatoes.

Join us for legal curiosities and tales of everyday mistakes that could technically get you into trouble. Essential listening for anyone interested in the intersections of law, public behaviour, and the unexpected ways regulations affect everyday life.

When the BBC went undercover at Charing Cross Police Station, it exposed shocking racism, misogyny, and abuse of power. But beyond the headlines, what does this say about the culture of policing today, and whether real change is even possible?

In this episode of Full Comment, criminal defence lawyers Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh and Edward Grange unpack the fallout from the Panorama documentary, exploring:

Candid, thoughtful, and unflinching, this conversation asks the hard questions about power, prejudice, and the kind of policing we want in a democratic society.

Expert evidence can make - or break - a case. In our latest podcast, Ed and Danielle discuss the duties, risks, and lessons every lawyer should know when working with expert witnesses.

Freshers’ Week beckons, and young adults making their way to university often experience a different kind of freedom, new friends and fun. But inevitably Freshers’ Week also sees a spike in arrests for alcohol related offences for public disorder, and other offences.

Ed and Danielle dispel a few urban myths about what is legal and what isn’t, as well as the role taken by universities and law enforcement.

In the season finale of Full Comment, Edward Grange and Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh tackle the mounting pressure on the UK’s criminal justice system.

They begin with the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Hayes & Palombo, a landmark case that casts a spotlight on judicial error and prompts wider questions about systemic failure.

From there, they explore Sir Brian Leveson’s phase one recommendations: proposals aimed at easing the backlog and restoring efficiency without breaking the public purse. Ed and Danielle debate ideas, including a controversial case amnesty, expanded summary offences, and the prospect of judge-only trials. They weigh the benefits of reform against the risks of eroding long-held principles like the right to a jury trial, reflecting on the impact of delay for both victims and defendants.

A thoughtful, at times radical, exploration of what change might look like and whether juries really are sacrosanct.

In episode 11 of Full Comment, we delve into the recent High Court judgment of Ayinde vs London Borough of Haringey, where generative AI was used in legal research resulting in fictitious legal citations, raising concerns about competence, supervision, and the future of how the legal profession engages with AI. 

The discussion explores:

•  What went wrong in the submissions placed before the court
  
• How this affects professional ethics, regulatory duties, and client trust
  
• What the judiciary expects from lawyers using AI tools
  
•  Why the responsibility extends to firm leadership and regulators

In Episode 10 of Full Comment, Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh and Edward Grange explore one of the UK’s most staggering recent miscarriages of justice: the case of Peter Sullivan, whose murder conviction was quashed in May 2025, after 38 years in prison.
Sullivan was convicted in 1987 of the murder of 21-year-old Diane Sindel. Four decades later, newly available DNA testing rendered his conviction unsafe. 
Danielle and Edward unpack:

• The timeline of Sullivan’s case and the role of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC)
• Why some believe the CCRC failed and what the stats really show
• How advances in forensic science are reshaping past convictions
• The real-life cost of wrongful imprisonment and whether compensation can ever be enough

In this episode of Full Comment, Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh and Edward Grange explore how the deliberate act of felling the tree at Sycamore Gap led to national outrage and a criminal damage conviction carrying serious custodial implications. But is it just about a tree? How is this different to criminal damage to Edward Colston’s statue in Bristol, toppled and defaced, but the defendants were found not guilty? Find out in our latest episode of Full Comment. 

Adolescence - part two. Inside Incel Culture: Law, Youth, and Online Harm
 
What exactly is incel culture and how should the criminal justice system respond to it?
 
In the latest Full Comment episode, Partners Danielle Reece Greenhalgh and Edward Grange unpack the rise of incel ideology, its spread through social media algorithms, and the legal and ethical questions it raises - particularly when young people are involved.
 
This episode builds on themes from Netflix’s Adolescence and asks urgent questions about youth, ideology, and the future of justice in an online world.

In this episode, the Corker Binning crime team dives into Netflix’s hit Adolescence, examining its portrayal of the criminal justice process for young suspects.

Join hosts Danielle Reece-Greenhalgh and Edward Grange, along with new Partner Henrietta Ronson, as they dissect Episode 1 of Adolsecence, following 13-year-old Jamie from a dramatic early morning arrest to a harrowing police interview.

From the depiction of custody procedures and legal rights to the often misrepresented role of defence solicitors, this episode offers a rare insider perspective from three seasoned criminal defence lawyers. It's a look at what really happens when a child enters the criminal justice system.