Public Access : Yes
- MA, History
- Graduate Diploma in Law
Before being called to the Bar, Robert trained as a chartered accountant. This experience has proved invaluable in cases concerning financial fraud.
He has also had careers within the Victim Support Unit, the Territorial Army Military Police and working in-house for a property developer, where he gained experience of housing law.
Robert practises principally in crime and is experienced in all areas of criminal law. He has both prosecuted and defended in a number of serious cases during which he has had to deal with intricate legal issues and difficult factual disputes.
Robert frequently conducts applications for confiscation made under POCA taking on issues of both the available amount and the total benefit gained.
Additionally, Robert has built up a particular expertise in the technically complex issues that can arise in road traffic law. He has received a number of instructions from solicitors that specialise in drink driving cases.
In addition to his criminal practice, Robert appears in the county court in road traffic claims and personal injury actions.
Robert takes instructions in family proceedings both in respect of child care and ancillary relief. Robert also accepts instructions in child maintenance cases involving the various enforcement procedures available.
- The Honorable Society of the Inner Temple
- Criminal Bar Association
- Western Circuit
Robert enjoys riding, cutting the forever rampant garden hedge, exhausting an inexhaustible English pointer and amusing a rescued greyhound.
- R v V & F; successfully prosecuted a conspiracy to defraud the Department of Work and Pensions involving the systematic theft and subsequent enactment of benefit cheques. The identification evidence of the two defendants was weak and insubstantial but Robert advised the case could proceed on the basis of the circumstantial evidence.
- R v S; prosecuted in one of the Bristol Tesco riot trials in which after liaison with the detectives in the case the prosecution were able during the trial to adduce evidence that rebutted assertions made by the defendant.
- R v M; prosecuted in a violent burglary in which there arose questions of abuse of process and admissibility of identification of evidence.
- R v H; defended an allegation of rape of juvenile half-sisters in which he had to deal with questions of disclosure and character of the complainants. The case was eventually dropped because of doubts about the credibility of the alleged victims.
- R v G; defended in a stabbing in a drunken love triangle situation. He had to deal with expert evidence about the differences between the allegations as to how the knife was used and the wounds suffered by the injured party.