She has built a strong all-round criminal practice. As well as accepting instructions from a number of highly respected defence firms, Jane is a CPS Panel Advocate (Grade 4) and has also prosecuted on behalf of various public and private bodies, including the Health and Safety Executive, RSPCA, the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and local authorities. Her practice embraces the entire range of criminal conduct. She is an extremely experienced jury advocate, and has appeared before the appellate courts on numerous occasions.
She is a persuasive advocate and an adept technical lawyer with the organisational and communication skills necessary for varied and complicated cases.
As a prosecutor, Jane is fair but robust, and works well as part of a team. As a defender she is tenacious and committed, and takes very seriously the trust reposed in her by her clients. Her commitment to detailed case analysis, combined with her intellect and friendly manner, have enabled her to build a successful and diverse practice as a criminal and regulatory barrister. She is expert at witness handling, both in examination-in-chief and cross-examination, and has a style which adapts easily to the various different forums in which she appears.
― Chambers UK (2023)
Jane really knows her stuff in professional regulation.
― Legal 500 (2023)
Jane has the rare skill of cross-examination that is polite but absolutely devastating.
― Legal 500 (2023)
Jane is very hardworking with excellent written skills. She has an analytical mind and client facing qualities.
― Legal 500 (2022)
Jane is a calm and persuasive orator, who combines courtroom flair with an excellent understanding of the issues.
― Legal 500
showing ‘initiative, firmness of purpose and ability beyond her call’.
…she can be relied upon to crystallise complex arguments clearly and concisely.
…hardworking, committed and determined.
Bright and hardworking, with exceptional judgement.
Client-friendly, and noted for her meticulous preparation.
An accomplished and tenacious advocate.
Extremely hardworking, focussed and effective.
Jane is regularly instructed for both the prosecution and the defence in cases of serious Sexual Offences, involving both adults and children. She is on the CPS RASSO panel and her wide experience encompasses offences of rape, sexual assaults, inciting a child to engage in sexual activity, brothel-keeping, grooming and indecent images, amongst others.
Jane has regularly mounted and defended arguments relating to s41 cross-examination about a complainant’s sexual history, abuse of process based on delay, hearsay and bad character.
She is an approachable advocate who possesses excellent judgement. She is committed to providing first class client care and is particularly strong in working with vulnerable witnesses.
Jane edited the chapter on ‘Vulnerable Witnesses’ in the most recent edition of Rook and Ward on Sexual Offences and assists the South Eastern Circuit with education, monitoring and development relating to s28 video-recorded cross-examination.
- R v VR (2022) – Instructed to prosecute a man accused of sexual offences against three young girls over a period of years, including his daughter and his niece. Use of s28 pre-recorded cross-examination.
- R v JW (2021) – Instructed to represent a man accused of rape. Mounted a s78 application to exclude evidence of the defendant’s confession at a festival when under the influence of drink and drugs, which involved evidence from three toxicological witnesses.
- R v GK (2021) – Secured the acquittal of a young man accused of ‘date rape’.
- R v CY (2020) – Appeared for the prosecution in the trial of a teacher accused of historic sexual offences against a pupil.
- R v JY (2019) – Successfully prosecuted a teenager for a nasty stranger rape in which the defendant had targeted a drunk and vulnerable young woman in Ipswich town centre and tricked his way into her flat.
- R v CA (2019) – Instructed to represent the first defendant of four accused of a series of rapes and other sexual offences over many years against a young girl aged between nine and 16.
- R v AS (2019) – Instructed to represent a 20-year-old man with schizophrenia, autism and ADHD against allegations of sexual activity with two 13-year-old boys and making indecent photographs. Secured an acquittal in relation to one of the complainants.
- R v JLW (2018) – Instructed to prosecute a defendant for numerous rapes and violence against his partner and violence against his daughter. Secured convictions and a lengthy sentence with a finding of dangerousness.
- R v JM (2018) – Acted for the prosecution in relation to allegations of historical sexual offences by an uncle against his niece.
- R v ED (2017) – Acted for a defendant with significant learning difficulties accused of sexual offences with her nephews. Secured a suspended sentence. (Led jnr)
- R v DA, EC and ZT (2017) – Instructed to prosecute three defendants involved in running brothels, one of whom was also convicted of sexual offences against sex workers. (Led jnr)
- R v PT (2017) – Instructed to prosecute a serving prisoner for further serious (historic) sexual offences against two young boys. Received life imprisonment.
- R v SB (2016) – Instructed to represent a young woman for assault by penetration offences against her best friend after a night out.
- R v LC (2016) – Instructed to represent a defendant accused of rape of an ex-girlfriend and of his 13-year-old sister.
- R v W (2016) – Instructed to prosecute of a 21-year-old charged with two counts of rape against a vulnerable young woman; one alleged to have taken place when the complainant was 14, the other soon after her 16th birthday.
- R v MS (2014) – Instructed to represent a 64-year-old man accused of committing serious historic sexual offences against young boys in the 1970s and 1980s when he ran an extra-curricular cycling club.
From privately-instructed Magistrates’ Court trials for battery to the most serious offences of s18 grievous bodily harm and attempted murder, violent crime remains a staple of Jane’s practice. She has also developed a specialism in prosecuting allegations involving parents or other caregivers accused of causing or allowing serious injury to children.
With experience ranging from successfully applying to read the complainant’s statement as hearsay in prosecutions for domestic violence, to persuading a reluctant judge not to send her university student client to prison, Jane is adept at all aspects of advocacy in every kind of violent crime.
Jane has also appeared for the prosecution in several murder trials, involving complicated legal arguments relating to joint responsibility of multiple defendants.
- R v JB (2021) – Successfully prosecuted in the Magistrates’ Court and on appeal to the Crown Court a man who had harassed a Conservative MP.
- R v BWD, SP, LS and SS (2020-2021) – Secured the convictions of three out of four of the defendants for murder. The deceased was a vulnerable young man who was the victim of a plot by the defendants to lure him out of his home and assault him. He was thrown into the river and drowned. Involved numerous legal arguments about the admissibility of bad character, confession evidence and hearsay, and complicated arguments relating to joint responsibility for the murder. (Led jnr)
- R v MD (2020) – Appeared as a led junior for the prosecution in this murder trial dating back to the late 1990s. The defendant had fled the country in the aftermath of the murder.
- R v SS and FPM (2019) – Successful prosecution of a couple who beat to death a vulnerable man who had let them into his flat on Christmas Day and then set fire to his flat to hide their crime. The evidence depended upon analysis of the deceased’s injuries, forensics, CCTV and lies told by the defendants. (Led jnr)
- R v LD and EW (2019) – Successfully prosecuted parents accused of causing or allowing multiple injuries to their twin babies in the first three months of their lives. Required calling expert evidence and skilful cross-examination of the defendants.
- R v DC (2019) – Instructed in the prosecution of gang-related violence involving serious injury with a machete in which the alleged victim has not given a statement.
- R v MB (2018) – Instructed to prosecute a young girl accused of glassing another young girl in a pub.
- R v TP & KS (2017) – Instructed to prosecute parents accused of causing or allowing serious injury to their three-month-old baby.
- R v LW & AS (2016) – Instructed to prosecute two defendants for coercive behaviour towards their daughter/partner.
- R v SC (2016) – Successful defence of accident to an allegation of stabbing an ex-partner in the stomach and hands.
- R v IM, DB, MM, DO, YI-S, YS and TJ (2015) – Prosecution of seven individuals for violent disorder arising from participation in the 2014 Million Mask March in central London, in the course of which metal barriers were thrown at police and at buildings such as the BBC.
- R v RH (2015) – Successful defence of an alleged violent attempted robbery whilst in possession of a firearm.
Serious & Organised Crime
Over the years, Jane has been instructed in a number of cases involving large-scale drugs supply and importation, people smuggling and sham marriages, both on her own and as a led junior. Through prosecuting such cases, she has become familiar with dealing with sensitive disclosure and the difficulties that can arise with such material. Jane has also developed strong tactical skills whilst defending in cases which involve sensitive material.
- Operation S (ongoing) – Instructed to advise on disclosure pre-charge in an NCA investigation into bribery allegations at a financial institution. (Led jnr)
- R v ML & CL (2021) – Instructed to act for the prosecution in a case involving the sale of drugs and false identity documents on the dark web by a father and son.
- R v DK (2022) – Instructed to represent a defendant charged with kidnap and false imprisonment arising from a drug-related revenge attack in East London.
- R v IB, RR, SS, MA and MA (2018) – Instructed to prosecute five defendants for involvement in a conspiracy to rob and substantive cash-in-transit robberies committed over a three-year period. All received substantial prison sentences. (Led jnr)
- Operation Erasure (2015) – Instructed to prosecute various defendants for supply or possession with intent to supply Class A drugs arising from an undercover police operation in the Southend area. [Press Report]
- R v CM (2014) – Large-scale conspiracy to supply enormous quantities of cocaine, amphetamine and cannabis and to launder the proceeds. The drugs were smuggled in the back of lorries carrying fruit and vegetables: cash seized exceeded £1m. The case involved significant legal argument including a successful technical argument on the scope of the European Arrest Warrant and arguments as to bad character and hearsay. (Def. jnr) [Press Report]
- R v L, S and J (2012) – Instructed by the CPS Complex Casework Unit to prosecute three defendants for conducting and organising sham marriages to contravene immigration restrictions. Reduced significant amounts of evidence into comprehensive schedules for presentation to the jury. (Led jnr) [Press Report]
Jane has considerable experience in prosecuting and defending fraud and other dishonesty cases of all kinds, from large-scale identity and boiler room fraud to offences contrary to the Insolvency Act. She is currently instructed by the SFO.
Jane is highly skilled in the essential elements of a fraud practice – she is able to marshal large amounts of evidence, distil it into a workable and comprehensible form and home in on the key issues. Her eye for detail and meticulous preparation have brought her considerable success in prosecuting and defending serious fraud and corporate crime.
- Operation H (ongoing) – Instructed for the SFO pre-charge in an investigation into alleged fraudulent pension schemes. (Led jnr)
- R v GH and 12 others (2018) – Successful prosecution of 12 out of 13 defendants over the course of three trials in a large-scale boiler room fraud and associated money laundering. (Leading jnr)
- R v H (2017) – Instructed to act for the Crown in the prosecution of a police officer who stole large sums of cash seized from suspects at Heathrow Airport. [Press Report]
- SFO v RK (2016) – Successful prosecution of a suspect in an SFO corruption case for deliberately disposing of two mobile phones. (Led jnr)
- R v J & S (2016) – Prosecuted three defendants in a complicated money laundering and mortgage fraud.
- R v S & others (2015) – Alleged multi-handed, million-pound property investment fraud. The defendants were said to have stolen money from a number of senior police officer investors and to have committed mortgage fraud. After significant legal argument regarding admissibility of evidence and abuse of process, the majority of the evidence was excluded on the main counts, and the prosecution offered no evidence. (Def. led jnr)
Proceeds of Crime and Confiscation
Jane has built up considerable experience in complicated confiscation proceedings and is well-versed in the Proceeds of Crime Act (POCA), the Drug Trafficking Act (DTA) and Criminal Justice Act (CJA) confiscation regimes as well as the restraint legislative framework. She has advised on the impact of property freezing orders, restraint orders, management receivership orders and confiscation orders upon the recovery of debt by a local authority. She has drafted s17 POCA defendant’s responses and has also represented clients in contested cash forfeiture proceedings.
Jane has lectured extensively on confiscation and restraint, most recently at Lambeth Council. She has a wide knowledge base and considerable hands-on experience of proceeds of crime work.
London Borough of Lambeth v AB, DB and BC Ltd (ongoing) – Confiscation proceedings arising from breaches of planning law.
- R v DA (2018-2019) – Confiscation proceedings involving company assets subject to liquidation and cash made subject to forfeiture proceedings.
- R v DA (2015) – Appeared for the defendant in confiscation following conviction for stealing approximately £250k. Involved complicated questions of recovery. The main asset was the family home where the defendant’s ex-wife and six children resided.
- R v AV (2014) – Instructed as led defence junior in a contested confiscation where the prosecution sought £1m from copyright-infringing films and TV programmes. Following a four-day hearing, the order was limited to approximately £80,000. [Press Report]
- R v JK and L Ltd (2014) – Instructed as defence junior in a confiscation against a limited company and its director arising from profits made from renting out flats constructed without planning permission and in breach of an enforcement notice. [Press Report]
Road Traffic Offences
Jane has a strong practice defending in private road traffic cases of all kinds. She gives fair, realistic advice on the law and prospects of success. She has a wide knowledge of road traffic case law and the myriad of defences available.
Jane understands the paramount importance of road traffic cases for those whose livelihood depends on their own and their employees’ driving records, as well as the implications that a conviction can have on licensing and standing with the Traffic Commissioners.
- R v G (2018) – Instructed to represent a high-profile professional on charges of drink driving arising from a road accident in which a cyclist was injured. Secured a favourable sentence and avoided adverse publicity.
- R v DD (2015) – Secured a favourable sentence for an individual who worked in the transport industry and was charged with driving with excess alcohol.
- R v RMS Ltd (2015) – Instructed to represent a waste management haulage company for use of a vehicle without an operator’s licence.
- R v NPC (2013) – Secured an acquittal of a coach company charged with two offences of failing to notify driver details.
Jane also prosecutes in serious road traffic offences resulting in death.
- R v LM (2021) – A mother of good character prosecuted for causing death by careless driving who killed a motorcyclist.
- R v RS (2017) – A lorry driver for causing two deaths by dangerous driving. Involved difficult legal issues of automatism. (Led jnr)
- R v JR (2017) – Causing death by careless driving whilst unfit through drink.
A large part of Jane’s practice is dedicated to regulatory work in Healthcare Regulation and in criminal regulatory cases. She has an impressive ability to master even the most technical of concepts, which has stood her in excellent stead when presenting allegations of clinical misconduct against a doctor, understanding clinical allegations made against her registrant clients, cross-examining experts of all specialisms, and, in one instance, constructing an argument on causation based upon the structure of heavy machinery.
In 2013 Jane completed a nine-month secondment at the General Medical Council as an in-house Legal Advisor with a caseload of close to 30 active investigations. Having demonstrated her ability to handle complex cases and provide sound advice, she now receives regular instructions from the GMC to appear before the Medical Practitioners’ Tribunal Service (MPTS). She also acts for the Health and Care Professions Council.
Jane also defends in regulatory proceedings. In particular, she regularly represents registrant nurses before the Committee of the Nursing and Midwifery Council and has appeared to defend before the Health and Care Professions Council, the General Osteopathic Council and the Association of Optometrists.
- GMC v Dr S (2022) – Instructed to act for the GMC in relation to numerous allegations against a trainee doctor of research misconduct, dishonesty and data misuse. Several medical experts were called as witnesses regarding the link between ill health and the allegations.
- GMC v X (2021) – Instructed to act for the GMC in a case involving serious sexual allegations against a doctor in which it was argued by the defence that the doctor’s health was so poor that it would not be fair to try him.
- GOC v DL (2021) – Instructed to represent an optician in relation to allegations of dishonest amendment of records.
- NMC v VS (2020) – Instructed to represent a care home deputy manager at an interim order hearing. Successfully argued that she should be allowed to work without restrictions, despite allegations of misconduct.
- NMC v AT (2018) – Instructed to represent a nurse who admitted dishonesty by writing a false reference for another healthcare professional. Managed to secure a short suspension despite the seriousness of the charges.
- GMC v Dr G (2018) – Instructed to represent the GMC in a case concerning a doctor convicted abroad of indecent acts with significant health problems. Several experts were called as to the link between the offending and the doctor’s health.
- GOsC v TV (2017) – Instructed for the defence of an osteopath accused of clinical misconduct, data protection breaches and failing to properly obtain consent. Expert evidence called by both sides. The vast majority of the charges were not found proved and the least sanction available was imposed.
- HCPC v RC (2017) – Instructed for the HCPC in allegations against a paramedic for driving a marked ambulance car at excessive speeds.
- HCPC v CB (2017) – Instructed to represent a physiotherapist regarding allegations of dishonesty and poor record-keeping. Despite factual admissions made, no misconduct was proved.
- GMC v Dr J (2016) – Instructed for the GMC in allegations of sexual misconduct against two patients.
- NMC v DC (2016) – Instructed for the defence of an NHS Direct nurse accused of multiple allegations of clinical misconduct, including an allegation of contributing to the death of a child.
- GMC v Dr A (2016) – Instructed for the GMC in multiple allegations of clinical misconduct, dishonesty, breach of interim conditions and serious attitudinal and communication failings.
Regulatory & Professional Disciplinary
As a List C Specialist Regulatory Advocate in Health & Safety and Environmental Law, Jane has considerable experience of criminal regulatory prosecution. Her skill-set is well-suited to the technical analysis required for this niche area of work.
Jane has often acted for local authorities in prosecutions under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (e.g. disposal of waste and breach of enforcement notices) and the Food Safety Act 1990.
Jane has acted for Ipswich Borough Council in obtaining civil closure orders under the Anti-Social Behaviour Act 2003 at the Magistrates’ Court. Given the emergency nature of these applications, she was briefed not more than 48 hours before each hearing. Jane has also appeared in quasi-criminal applications in the magistrates’ and Crown Court, such as applications for Football Banning Orders and Anti-Social Behaviour Orders, which incorporate both civil and criminal rules of evidence.
Jane provides advice at every stage of proceedings and assists in directing the course of the investigation and prosecution within this specialist area of work.
- R v JM (2017) – Instructed to advise a client regarding allegations brought by the Environment Agency of operating a waste facility without a permit.
- HSE v F Ltd (2015) – Instructed as led junior successfully prosecuting a multinational corporation charged with breaching its duty to non-employees. Part of the transport system for a wind turbine blade fell, killing one and seriously injuring another construction worker. Succeeded in marshalling witnesses from all over the world to give evidence via Skype. [Press Report]
- R v A & A (2014) – Instructed to prosecute for a local authority for breach of a planning enforcement notice. Successfully opposed an abuse of process argument and application to dismiss, on complicated and novel legal points about interpretation of planning permissions, ‘change of use’ and validity of the enforcement notice. The rulings were later upheld on appeal.
- R v T (2012) – Instructed to represent South Cambridgeshire District Council in the prosecution of an individual for managing an unlicensed House in Multiple Occupancy contrary to the Housing Act. The property was badly maintained and judged by the Fire Department to be a fire hazard.
Jane has appeared in Extradition cases both at first instance and before the High Court on appeal, and has experience of the complex legal arguments and thorny factual issues which can arise.
- Germany v DJ (2015) – Instructed to appear in the magistrates’ court and in the Administrative Court to oppose the extradition on human rights grounds a British national accused of large-scale tax fraud.
- France v BF (2009) – Instructed to represent a British national, whose extradition was sought by French authorities for murder (or equivalent). Unusual case because the authorities only knew of the client’s involvement in the death because he had disclosed it as part of the cleansing process before giving evidence for the prosecution as a convicted defendant. Opposed extradition on the grounds of delay, at first instance and in the Administrative Court.
- BVC, City University: Very Competent
- GDL (CPE), City University: Commendation
- BA (Hons) Modern Languages, Oxford University: 2:1
- CPS Panel Advocate (Grade 4) (2018)
- CPS Panel Advocate (RASSO) (2015)
- SFO Counsel Panel List (2013)
- GMC List of Counsel (2013)
- Health & Safety Executive (HSE), Office of the Rail Regulator (ORR) & Environment Agency Regulatory (List C) (2012)
- Pupil Supervisor
- Joint Head of Chambers Education and Training Committee
- South Eastern Circuit
- Spanish (conversational)
- French (conversational)