Anthony studied mathematics at Durham University before converting to law and undertaking the Bar Professional Training Course (BPTC) at Nottingham Law School. Returning to the North East in 2017, Anthony completed pupillage under the supervision of Joanne Kidd and Richard Bennett.
Anthony combines a logical approach to the law with a realistic, client-focussed attitude. He has been described by his colleagues and local solicitors as conscientious, helpful and well-prepared.
Anthony is a CPS Grade 3 prosecutor and undertakes both prosecution and defence work in the Crown Court, Youth Court and Magistrates’ Courts. He also accepts instructions for regulatory work and proceedings under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (POCA), including stand-alone applications e.g. for restraint, detention, and forfeiture of cash, as well as substantive confiscation matters.
Prior to the BPTC Anthony worked as a fee earner in the fraud department of a large criminal defence firm in the Midlands, primarily dealing with POCA/confiscation proceedings. He also acted as a fully accredited police station representative. This combination gives him an excellent understanding of the pre-court and post-conviction criminal process to add to his increasing trial experience in the Crown Court.
Awards & Scholarships
Lord Denning Scholarship (Lincoln’s Inn, 2016-17)
Hardwicke Entrance Award (Lincoln’s Inn, 2016-17)
Dean’s Scholarship for Academic Excellence (Nottingham Law School 2016-17)
Wolfson Scholarship (Lincoln’s Inn, 2017-18)
Bursary Award for Excellence in Advocacy (Criminal Bar Association, 2017-18)
R v JR (2023) – secured convictions against a defendant who had defrauded two vulnerable victims multiple times. The prosecution relied on a hearsay account for half the indictment, after one 99-year-old complainant sadly passed away prior to trial. Sentenced to 3.5 years imprisonment.
R v RC & LS (2022) – junior prosecution counsel in a trial at NCC for importation of 115kg cocaine (wholesale value £4,025,000).
R v CD & Ors (2022) – junior prosecution counsel in a 6-handed trial at TCC for firearms and drugs offences.
R v JA & Ors (2021) – junior counsel for D1 in a 7-handed trial at NCC for conspiracy to supply cocaine and amphetamine as part of an alleged OCG, in a trial lasting 22 weeks.
HBC v AD; AD&SHI Ltd (2021) – secured convictions for CPUTR 2008 offences against the defendant and his company. The trial involved a series of legal arguments.
Insolvency Service v DB; CB (2021) – successful prosecution against two defendants who had obtained a £15,500 loan from a vulnerable friend without disclosing their state of bankruptcy.
R v JS & Ors (2020) – defended one of three jointly charged with a commercial burglary, trial at TCC. Successful half-time submission on inadequacy of the ID.
R v TH (2020) – defended a youth for assisting an offender, where the index offence was death by dangerous driving. The issue for trial was ID, but the case concluded with a successful half-time submission on a technical point.
MBC v SA (2020) – successful prosecution for offences under Food Safety and Hygiene Regulations 2013 and the CPUTR 2008. Complimented on his presentation of the case.
R v BW (2019) – defence trial for s.111A benefit fraud. Obtained an acquittal despite the introduction of recent bad character for the same offence.
R v CH (2019) – secured a further suspended sentence after a plea on a basis on the day of trial to a charge of assault by beating, where the defendant was in breach of a suspended sentence imposed only 2 months prior for an offence of affray.
DCC v MC (2019) – prosecuted an appeal against conviction for taxi licence offences. The case involved a technical point of law whilst dealing carefully with the appellant, a vulnerable litigant in person.
R v AH (2019) – defence trial for two charges of assault by beating in a domestic context. Obtained not guilty verdicts on both charges, despite cogent evidence from the complainant backed up with corresponding photographs of alleged injuries.
R v OJ (2018) – prosecution trial for being in charge whilst over the prescribed limit. Successfully argued that the case should continue past half-time, after initial comments from the District Judge indicating that she would rule otherwise.