R v AS – The defence of a male in the British Army who was accused of befriending a juvenile female cadet and causing her to engage in sexual activity.
Report: Daily Mail
R v Scrivens – Defending a care home manager accused of perverting the course of justice and obstructing the coroner. The case against the defendant was that she and other colleagues at a care home had covered up circumstances of the death of an elderly resident. The daughter of the resident was to be married on the morning that she learnt of her father’s death. Her father was due to give her way.
Reports: Mirror Online The Bolton News The Sun
Boyle and Ford v The United Kingdom – This case concerned an allegation of murder and a specific point of law in the Court of Appeal, the House of Lords and in late 2010 the European Court of Human Rights. The case specifically concerned the question of what might constitute a jury misdirection when dealing with a defendant’s silence in the face of questioning in the police station. The case of Boyle and Ford now features in Archbold and was subsequently followed in two further authorities.
R v Stones – Led junior – murder. The prosecution alleged the uncommon offence of matricide. The case included the preparation for and cross-examination of two expert witnesses in the field of neuropharmacology.
R v Thew – Prosecution brief – Court of Appeal – heard by the Lord Chief Justice. The case was connected to the murder of two female police officers in Manchester and the appeal was reported in the national newspapers.
R v Hare  – Defending a 66 year old long-standing treasurer of a Bolton social club who siphoned over £130,000 from the club’s bank account over five years.
Report: The Bolton News
R v Cracknell – The successful defence of a young female alleged to have attacked another female causing multiple glass lacerations.
Report: The Sun Online
R v Wilkes – Successful defence of a male alleged to have used extreme violence with a samurai sword.
R v Stokes – Successful defence of a male accused of stabbing his neighbour.
R v Dean – Successful defence – arson with intent to endanger life. The prosecution case concerned an allegation that against the background of a turf war in the Kurdish community the defendant had thrown a Molotov cocktail into a restaurant. The case rested on forensic evidence.
R v Horrocks – A successful defence of a man charged with racially aggravated public order offences and an offence under the Dangerous Dogs Act. Following a 15 month battle, counsel and his instructing solicitor through a concerted team effort brought about a stay to proceedings on the basis that the defendant could no longer receive a fair trial. Counsel and those who instructed him had spent 15 months fighting to obtain appropriate and complete disclosure under the provisions of the CPIA1996 and the Criminal Procedure Rules. Having listed the case repeatedly to force disclosure issues the prosecution found themselves unable to justify the failures in the case. The learned Judge delivering the judgement noted that he had never anticipated that he would have to give such a judgement and take such an exceptional step. Counsel was instructed by Mrs Tracy Haslam of AFG Law, Bolton.
R v Peake – Defence instructions received to represent a defendant charged with benefit fraud in the a
mount of £70,000. The defendant had claimed that he could not walk, bathe or use the toilet without assistance. The prosecution ultimately proved that during the period of his claim to disability benefit the defendant had represented Great Britain in the Commonwealth games. The case was widely reported in the national newspapers.
R v V – St Helens Magistrates Court. Successful defence of a serving Magistrate accused of a racially aggravated public order offence.
R v FMc  – The successful defence of an 85 year old male accused of serious sexual abuse against his daughter and 2 granddaughters.
R v DS  – A successful defence of a male charged with sexual activity with a child. This is the second instruction received by Counsel in the area of sexsomnia. The defence at trial was one of non-insane automatism in that the defendant’s act had occurred in sleep and that he was experiencing a parasomnia.
R v A  – A defence of a male charged with the rape and sexual assault of two separate partners. The defence raised the rare defence of ‘sexsomnia’ a condition like sleepwalking where the sufferer can engage in sexual activity in their sleep. The condition has only ever been diagnosed 80 times in its history and counsel was required to conduct detailed cross-examination of a leading expert in the condition of sleep.
Read Colin Buckle’s ‘Inside 18’ Newsletter “Sleep Sex – Waking Up to a New Dawn in the Criminal Courts” here
R v Curnock  – The successful prosecution of an education welfare official who installed secret spy cameras around a primary school to operate as a peeping tom.
Reports: Mirror Online Daily Mail The Bolton News
R v Needham  – The successful prosecution of a retired driving instructor who ‘started abusing a girl after he was diagnosed with cancer’.
Report: The Bolton News
R v J – Successful defence of man accused of the rape of his own daughter.
R v R – (Isleworth) defence of a male accused of the rape and sexual assault of a child family member.
R v B – Defence instructions to represent a male charged with a stranger rape which was said to have been caught on CCTV.
R v S – A successful defence in a case of historic sexual abuse concerning the alleged abuse of a young male pupil by a male sports teacher.
R v S – Led junior in a two week trial concerning allegations of rape and sexual assault.
R v F – Defence of a male accused of kidnap and attempted rape. The prosecution alleged that the defendant had approached women in Manchester city centre and had dragged them towards secluded alley-ways.
R v J – “News of the World” newspaper sting targeting internet paedophiles.
R v H – Led junior in a two week trial defending a male accused of numerous sexual offences against children.
R v N – Two separate cases against the same defendant alleging sexual assaults against a child.. The defendant in the case suffered with significant learning difficulties.