“You are an excellent barrister – I will be instructing you at every opportunity!”Instructing solicitor
Pamela is a criminal barrister who defends and prosecutes a wide range of offences. Throughout pupillage she has enjoyed a busy criminal practice and is regularly instructed to prosecute for CPS and the Probation Service. She also regularly defends all types of hearings in the Magistrates’ and Crown Courts.
Prior to pupillage, Pamela was an employed barrister (non-practicing) working as a legal adviser with HMCTS and is therefore familiar with the law and procedure covering all aspects of criminal law.
Pamela has experience as a paralegal in regulatory work, particularly professional disciplinary proceedings preparing matters going in front of the Nursing and Midwifery Council, and also in family law. Her criminal experience stands her in very good stead for quasi-criminal hearings, particularly disciplinary hearings, non-molestation orders and contested fact finding hearings.
Pamela is a calm and reassuring presence who is able to deal with cases quickly and efficiently. The skills and experience she has acquired from criminal law transfer neatly into family law, particularly because both crime and family work involve highly emotive and sensitive scenarios.
Pamela can defend in all adult and youth general crime matters in the Magistrates’ Court including:
Knife crime and offensive weapons;
She has regularly been instructed to represent defendants at the Crown Court for bail applications, sentencing hearings, PTPHs, and Appeals from Magistrates’ Courts. She has experience of successfully applying for bail in cases where it has previously been denied, and in resisting applications for custody after breach of suspended sentences.
Pamela is instructed by leading motoring firms to defend driving offences including at trials and applications for special reasons and exceptional hardship.
Pamela is a Grade 1 CPS prosecutor who is actively working towards Grade 2. She has prosecuted trial lists in Magistrates’ courts in London and Essex. She has also been instructed to prosecute in the Crown Court, and has dealt with sentencing and Appeals from the Magistrates' Court.
Pamela has also successfully made applications for restraining orders, criminal behaviour orders and Football Banning orders.
Pamela is a National Probation Service (NPS) External Prosecutor and is regularly instructed by them. She has presented breach proceedings in the Crown Court to enforce Suspended Sentence Orders and Community Orders.
Regulatory and disciplinary proceedings
Prior to coming to the Bar, Pamela worked for the Financial Ombudsman Service, General Dental Council and Nursing and Midwifery Council dealing with regulatory and disciplinary issues. She is experienced in these types of proceedings, and is aware of the evidence required to prove allegations and the best way to both prosecute and defend.
Pamela is also experienced at dealing with regulatory matters in the Magistrates' Courts, for example dealing with a TFL licensing appeal and extradition hearings.
Pamela has experience of private children law proceedings, and actively welcomes instructions in this area. She has dealt with a range of cases including disputes over contact, and child abduction.
Pamela also acts in applications for non-molestation orders and the return dates on interim injunctions. Her experience from criminal courts is particularly useful in cases where there are allegations of domestic abuse, and she is able to assimilate information at short notice in emergency proceedings.
- BPTC - City Law School: Very competent
- LLB Law - London Metropolitan University: 1st Class Honours
- ARDL - Association of Regulatory and Disciplinary Lawyers
- Inner Temple Marshall Hall Trust Award 2022
- City Law School Rosie Keane Scholarship Award 2015
- Jack Petchey Outstanding Achiever Award 2007
R v AB : Represented the defendant who was accused of possession of an offensive weapon in prison under s40CA Prison Act 1952. Pamela discredited the prison officer's evidence in cross examination and the defendant was acquitted at half time due to the bench finding on the second limb of Galbraith that the evidence was so confused and tenuous that tribunal could not convict.
R v EH: Represented the defendant and secured an acquittal at half time on the second limb of Galbraith. The offence was a high value theft from employer and Pamela's cross examination called into question the strength and reliability of key records as well as highlighting the inadequate investigation where reasonable enquiries were missed.
R v BM (Youth Court): Represented the defendant on a contested abuse of process trial where the issue was wheterh the police gave assurances not to prosecute an offence of ‘being in possession of a bladed article at school’, but to give a youth caution if full admissions were made at interview. Pamela persuaded the judge to stay the case having left him in no doubt that the assurances were made, which in these exceptional circumstances, was in the public interest to be fulfilled despite the serious offence.
R v TE: Represented the defendant who was before the court in relation to a second breach of a Suspended Sentence Order (SSO) by commission of a further offence, in a short period of time from the order inception. Following Pamela's strong mitigation, the SSO was not activated.
DVSA v EB: Represented a co-defendant on s1 Fraud by false representation by impersonation at a practical driving test (X2) and s6(1) possession of driving licences for use in Fraud (x2). On committal for sentence, Pamela secured a suspended sentence for the client where the starting point on precedent caselaw was immediate custody.
R v SW: Successfully applied for bail at the Crown Court after bail was withheld prior to Pamela's involvement on two previous occasions.
Child Contact Arrangement hearing: Represented the applicant father who had been unsuccessful at reaching any agreement with the unrepresented respondent mother and managed to secure an order by consent, negotiating acceptable terms with both parties.
P v P (Child Abduction): Appeared at the High Court in an application for a summary return order of a child from Poland.
S v S (Child Contact): Represented the respondent mother and opposed an interim order for indirect contact with grandparent applicants. There were allegations of domestic violence and controlling and coercive behaviour case.