Former London US law firm lawyer guilty of stalking neighbours

Avatar photo

By Legal Cheek on

12

Convicted alongside mother

Lady Justice
A solicitor who spent time working in the London offices of several top US law firms has been found guilty of stalking her neighbour.

Linda Lu, 35, was found guilty this week, along with her mother, Susan Chen, of stalking that caused serious alarm or distress.

BBC News reports that the victims, James and Lynn Smith, were targeted by the pair following a disagreement about a hedge in July 2023.

When Mr Smith attempted to trim the hedge separating his property from the one rented by Chen, Lu reportedly objected, “threatening him with legal action from an upstairs window”.

Lu spent time in the London offices of several leading US firms, including Fried Frank, Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft, and Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman. She completed her training at Scottish outfit Dickson Minto and qualified as a solicitor in 2015.

 The 2025 Legal Cheek Firms Most List

Videos recorded by Mr Smith, which were played in court, reportedly showed Chen and Lu “shouting derogatory abuse”, including the use of terms such as “retards”.

The actions continued for more than two months following the initial dispute, and included alleged “periods of loud metallic banging”, according to the BBC’s report.

Lu and her mother, who represented themselves during the trial, claimed that they were, in fact, the ones being “stalked and harassed”.

Despite their claims, both were found guilty after a five-week trial at Lincoln Crown Court, with the jury reaching a verdict in less than two hours. The pair have been remanded in custody, awaiting sentencing in December.”

Judge James House KC adjourned sentencing to give time for victim impact statements and the production of a pre-sentence report. Lu agreed to assist with the preparation of a psychiatric report, while Chen chose not to.

In 2021, Lu faced allegations of misconduct from the solicitors’ regulator due to a series of posts on her Instagram account, which at the time had over 330,000 followers. She was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing.

12 Comments

John Doe

A five week trial for this nonsense?! Who, how, what and why? Honestly, no wonder the judiciary is on its knees.

Jane Doe

The criminal barristers moan and moan, but this shows how their prima donna attitude just drives up costs for taxpayers. The time given to trials lacks any concept of proportionality.

Neil

Her and her mother were defending themselves.

Jim Doe

So? The judge controls trials.

Cfarr

@Jane Doe, the report says that both of the defendants represented themselves, meaning that the only criminal barrister instructed in the case would have been the one representing the prosecution. Often, when criminal barristers are NOT involved, that is the cause of a trial taking much longer than it should.

Roger That

lol

Anonymous

THAT REQUIRED A 5 WEEK TRIAL?!

Junior Leachman

This case should not taken fives. The case should have referred to mediation, conciliation or arbitration. Why waste the courts time and taxpayers money on such trivial matters.

This is one of the reasons there is a backlog in the courts.

Bart

Remanded in custody?? More of a shock than the 5 week trial.

Pippo

5 weeks!. Did everyone speak really slowly 😆

Anonymous

The 5 week trial was a complete waste of time. This should have gone to mediation and should have been dealt with in an afternoon. The police and the courts should spend 5 weeks trial prosecuting real criminals instead of wasting the public purse

Anon

Oh, if only you were there and heard and saw it. Then you would not be making any of the above comments.

Join the conversation

Related Stories

Top judge blasts ‘creeping march of anonymity’ in solicitor disciplinary rulings

High Court orders transparency in misconduct acquittal of City lawyer over posts on her 330,000-follower Instagram account

Jul 7 2022 2:02pm
4