Tom Edwards

  • Year of Call 2008

Instruct Tom

Introduction

Introduction

Tom specialises exclusively in crime and regulatory work, predominantly defending in serious and complex cases. He defends in the full range of criminal offences and is often instructed in cases involving complex or difficult factual issues or defences. Tom is also a grade two prosecutor.

Tom is known for his succinct advice and strong jury speeches. He is often requested to act for defendants he has previously represented. 

Tom gives each client the same consistently high standard of representation irrespective of the offence or difficulty of the case. He has a relaxed approach with clients but a determined approach to advocacy. He maintains a “can-do” attitude and works well with professional clients in the preparation of the case, seeking to give a tactical edge wherever possible. 

Crime

Crime

Tom specialises exclusively in crime, predominantly defending in serious and complex cases. He defends in the full range of criminal offences and is often instructed in cases involving complex or difficult factual issues or defences. 

Tom is known for his succinct advice, strong jury speeches and is often requested to act for defendants I have previously represented. 

Tom gives each client the same consistently high standard of representation irrespective of the offence or difficulty of the case. He has a relaxed approach with clients but a determined approach to advocacy. He maintains a “can-do” attitude and works well with professional clients in the preparation of the case, seeking to give a tactical edge wherever possible. 

Notable Cases

Notable Cases

Serious and Violent Crime Cases:

R v OJ (Kingston CC)
Possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life. Case involved a co-defendants DNA and large volumes of telephone evidence concerning the transfer of a loaded firearm. 

R v AB and others (St Albans CC)
Two-week conspiracy to cause GBH. Tom acted for the first defendant on the indictment, the only defendant to be acquitted on the two counts of conspiracy to cause GBH. The case involved a cut-throat defence and issues of non-defendants bad character. Tom also cross-examined a witness with learning difficulties, eliciting a key piece of evidence in the defendant’s acquittal. Case reported in Watford Observer.

R v JM (Reading CC)
Acquittal in a domestic violence case where the defendant was alleged to have caused GBH with intent. A submission of no case to answer was successful in relation to counts of s.18 and s.20. Dogged efforts in disclosure meant that it was discovered that there was a difference in the opinion of the doctors who had examined the complainant’s cheek which was allegedly fractured. The jury found the defendant not guilty on the remaining count of ABH.

R v SR (Reading CC)
Robbery with a firearm. Tom successfully argued that the identification by the officer in the case was inadmissible as well as comments made to arresting officer. 

R v SR (Isleworth CC)
S.18 involving a blinding to the right eye of the complainant. Key disclosure evidence pointed the finger at a third party. The defendant was unanimously acquitted by the jury. 

R v AH (Snaresbrook CC)
Section 18 domestic violence allegation made by the defendant’s partner. Unanimous acquittal. 

R v CP  (Southwark CC)  
An alleged knife-point robbery of a local gastropub owner in Earls Court. The defence was that the complainant was in fact sexually assaulting a prostitute and that the defendant had only intervened to assist the woman. 

R v MW  (Basildon CC)  
A case of serious assault on a nine-month old child. Case involved complex paediatric evidence relating to a spiral fracture of the femur.

R v MM (Snaresbrook CC)
A case of robbery and fraud involving medical, computer and telephone evidence. At the conclusion of the case Tom was complemented by the Judge for doing “an excellent job in a very difficult case”

Drugs and Money Laundering Cases:

R v MB
Representing a known gang member on a charge of conspiracy to supply class A drugs over a period of eight months. After six days the defendant was acquitted of PWITS class A running the defence of duress. Case involved over 400 pages of disclosure. 

R v JS
A case described as the “real life Breaking Bad”. Defendant found in possession of a recipe and all the equipment needed to make crystal meth. Case reported on BBC.

R v DK and JR (Central Criminal Court)
A four-week private money laundering case where Tom acted as junior to two defendants lead by Queens Counsel. The case was reported in The Times, The Guardian, and The Standard.

R v HM (Cambridge CC)
Four-week money laundering trial instructed as junior alone representing the partner of a drug dealer alleged to have disposed of nearly £30,000 in cash. 

Sexual Offences Cases:

R v JK (Aylesbury Crown Court)
Rape, trial and retrial following a hung jury. Case involved cross-examination on sexual history as well as cross-examination of an expert on genital injuries. 

R v MS (Central Criminal Court)
Defence of a refugee charged with sexual assault. MS was alleged to have grabbed his neighbor whilst masturbating and trying to pull her into his flat. Defendant was acquitted after a retrial. 

R v RB (Isleworth CC)
Allegation of historic sexual abuse dating back to 1979. Case involved multiple counts of indecent assault on a child.

R v DD (Reading CC)
Instructed to act for a defendant with mental health difficulties in a rape. Prosecution subsequently offered no evidence.

R v MH (Woolwich CC)
Privately instructed defence of an Uber driver alleged to have groped a female employee of a major City insurance firm. Defendant found not guilty. 

R v YQ (Blackfriars CC)
Allegation against an Uber driver. The prosecution dropped the case following disclosure of text messages sent by the complainant revealed that she may have consented to kissing the driver. 

R v MM (Harrow CC)
Instructed as Junior on a 21-count indictment alleging historic rape and sexual abuse. The case involved allegations made by three complainants and weighty disclosure issues as the complainant had anonymously had a book published about the ordeal. 

R v MS (Reading CC)
Teacher discovered to have a number of indecent images on his laptop.

Prosecution Cases:

R v JRP (Central Criminal Court) 
Possession of a firearm. Case involved officers from the Territorial Support Group and arguments regarding contact DNA. Defendant convicted following retrial. 

R v NO (Reading County Court)
Prosecution on behalf of the Royal Mail. Case reported in The Telegraph.

Court of Appeal:

R v David Wiles
Successful appeal against conviction for going equipped. At trial the Judge had admitted a series of nearly 70 thefts in the local area, none of which had a proven link to the defendant, despite an application to exclude the evidence. The Court found the evidence to be highly prejudicial and quashed the conviction.

R v Hannibal Habte 
Appeared without permission on a renewed application for leave to appeal against a four-year sentence imposed for burglary. Permission was granted and the appeal allowed. 

R v Shane Fitzpatrick – Appeared Pro Bono on behalf of the defendant in a renewed application for leave to appeal conviction. Following the renewed application the Court granted permission. The case involved a recently decided authority on good character directions.

Testimonials

Testimonials

Tom has received a number of judicial compliments. In a recent case involving armed robbery with a firearm he was described by the judge as having represented his client “impeccably”. 

He was also described by another judge as “Rolls-Royce Counsel”. 

On a recent appeal (instructed where Tom did not conduct the proceedings), The Court of Appeal thanked him for his “succinct and powerful submissions”. 

Following a five-day trial, the Judge described Tom’s performance as “flawless”.

Qualifications

Qualifications

LLB (Kings College London)